MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048570302 · doi:10.1101/2020.08.12.20157271

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ETHNICITY AND SEVERE COVID-19 DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2020· review· en· W3048570302 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antony Raharja, Alice Tamara, Li Teng Kok

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEthnic groupInterquartile rangeRelative riskMeta-analysisDemographyMEDLINECochrane LibraryInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Multiple reports suggest a disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on ethnic minorities. Whether ethnicity is an independent risk factor for severe Covid-19 disease is unclear. Purpose Review the association between ethnicity and poor outcomes including all-cause mortality, hospitalisation, critical care admission, respiratory and kidney failure. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database up to 15/06/2020, and preprint servers. No language restriction. Study Selection All studies providing ethnicity-aggregated data on the pre-specified outcomes, except case reports or interventional trials. Data Extraction Pairs of investigators independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), and rated certainty of evidence following GRADE framework. Data Synthesis Seventy-two articles (59 cohort studies with 17,950,989 participants; 13 ecological studies; 54 US-based and 15 UK-based; 41 peer-reviewed) were included for systematic review and 45 for meta-analyses. Risk of bias was low, with median NOS 7 of 9 (interquartile range 6-8). In the unadjusted analyses, compared to white ethnicity, all-cause mortality risk was similar in Black (RR:0.96 [95%CI: 0.83-1.08]), Asian (RR:0.99 [0.85-1.16]) but reduced in Hispanic ethnicity (RR:0.69 [0.57-0.84]). Age and sex-adjusted-risks were significantly elevated for Black (HR:1.38 [1.09-1.75]) and Asian (HR:1.42 [1.15-1.75]), but not for Hispanic (RR:1.14 [0.93-1.40]). Further adjusting for comorbidities attenuated these association to non-significance; Black (HR:0.95 [0.72-1.25]); Asian (HR:1.17 [0.84-1.63]); Hispanic (HR:0.94 [0.63-1.44]). Similar results were observed for other outcomes. In subgroup analysis, there was a trend towards greater disparity in outcomes for UK ethnic minorities, especially hospitalisation risk. Limitations Paucity of evidence on native ethnic groups, and studies outside the US and UK. Conclusions Currently available evidence cannot confirm ethnicity as an independent risk factor for severe Covid-19 illness, but indicates that disparity may be partially attributed to greater burden of comorbidities. Registration PROSPERO, CRD42020188421 Funding source none

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.031
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.269
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207