Characteristics and outcomes of family practice patients with COVID-19: A case series from Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: The clinical history and outcomes of COVID-19 among people not hospitalized is not yet well characterized. To better inform clinical evaluation, we set out to characterize the natural history of COVID-19 in primary health care. Methods: Case series of all patients rostered to physicians at a university-affiliated Family Medicine clinic. Cases met the Center for Disease Control (CDC) definition of COVID-19 disease. Results: 89 patients meeting CDC criteria for COVID-19 disease were documented from March 1 to May 21, 2020. Their average age was 55.6 (range 6 to 95) years, and all but one was symptomatic. 57 cases (64%) had a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for COVID-19, of whom 77.2% tested positive. 30 cases (33.7%) reported contact with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19. Based on the Charlson Comorbidity Index, 28 (31.5%) cases had no comorbid conditions. The median number of days from symptom onset to first PCR test was 6 days [Interquartile range 2.3 to 11 days]. The median duration of fever was 3.5 days [Interquartile range 1 to 7 days]. 24 cases (27%) visited the Emergency Department (ED) and 10 were admitted to hospital. The median number of days between symptom onset and first ED visit was 8 days [Interquartile range 3.5 to 27 days]. Conclusions: At the start of this pandemic, the implementation of basic public health measures such as diagnostic testing and contact tracing were delayed. If we are to improve our control over the spread of COVID-19, we will need to substantially reduce the time from symptom onset to diagnostic testing, and subsequent contact tracing. To minimize unnecessary ED visits, we propose a testable strategy for Family Medicine to engage with COVID-19 patients in the acute phase of their illness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".