Comparative profile for COVID-19 cases from China and North America: Clinical symptoms, comorbidities and disease biomarkers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Large inter-individual and inter-population differences in the susceptibility to and outcome of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been noted. Understanding these differences and how they influence vulnerability to infection and disease severity is critical to public health intervention. AIM: To analyze and compare the profile of COVID-19 cases between China and North America as two regions that differ in many environmental, host and healthcare factors related to disease risk. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis to examine and compare demographic information, clinical symptoms, comorbidities, disease severity and levels of disease biomarkers of COVID-19 cases from clinical studies and data from China (105 studies) and North America (19 studies). RESULTS: COVID-19 patients from North America were older than their Chinese counterparts and with higher male: Female ratio. Fever, cough, fatigue and dyspnea were the most common clinical symptoms in both study regions (present in about 30% to 75% of the cases in both regions). Meta-analysis for the prevalence of comorbidities (such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and chronic kidney diseases) in COVID-19 patients were all significantly more prevalent in North America compared to China. Comorbidities were positively correlated with age but at a significantly younger age range in China compared to North American. The most prevalent infection outcome was acute respiratory distress syndrome which was 2-fold more frequent in North America than in China. Levels of C-reactive protein were 4.5-fold higher in the North American cases than in cases from China. CONCLUSION: The differences in the profile of COVID-19 cases from China and North America may relate to differences in environmental-, host- and healthcare-related factors between the two regions. Such inter-population differences-together with intra-population variability-underline the need to characterize the effect of health inequities and inequalities on public health response to COVID-19 and can assist in preparing for the re-emergence of the epidemic.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.304 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it