MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3120196836 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042008

Epidemiology, clinical characteristics and treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19): a protocol for a living systematic review

2021· article· en· W3120196836 on OpenAlexafffund
Lazar Milovanovic, Erin Hessey, Meghan Sebastianski, Diana Keto‐Lambert, Ben Vandermeer, Sean M. Bagshaw, Oleksa Rewa

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINEEpidemiologyPsychological interventionCINAHLCochrane LibraryCase fatality rateSystematic reviewIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineMeta-analysisInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In December 2019, the first cases of COVID-19 associated with SARS-CoV-2 viral infection were described in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. Since then, it has spread rapidly affecting 188 countries and was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020. Preliminary reports suggest up to 30% of patients require intensive care unit (ICU) admission and case fatality rate estimate is 2.3%-7.2%. The primary reason for ICU admission is hypoxaemic respiratory failure, while factors associated with ICU admission include increased age, presence of comorbidities and cytokine storm. Case series and retrospective trials initially assessed proposed treatments with randomised controlled trials now reporting early outcomes. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify epidemiological factors, treatments and complications that predict mortality among critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our comprehensive search strategy was developed in consultation with a research librarian. We will search electronic databases: Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Wiley Cochrane Library. The search strategy combines concepts from COVID-19, validated COVID-19 search filters and geographical locations of large outbreaks. Citation screening, selection, quality assessment and data abstraction will be performed in duplicate. Clinically homogenous epidemiological characteristics, interventions and complications will be pooled in statistical meta-analysis. Within the framework of a living systematic review, the search and data analysis will be updated every 6 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our systematic review will synthesise literature on risk factors and interventions associated with mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Results will be presented at national and international conferences and submitted for peer-reviewed publication. The pooled analysis can provide guidance to inform clinical guidelines for care of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Iterative updates will be made public through open access. Research ethics approval is not required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020176672.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.015
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.006

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 head0.891
GPT teacher head0.692
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews→French-language works237,207→