MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127973826 · doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2021.01.065

Remdesivir and systemic corticosteroids for the treatment of COVID-19: A Bayesian re-analysis

2021· article· en· W3127973826 on OpenAlexafffund
Todd C. Lee, Emily G. McDonald, Guillaume Butler‐Laporte, Luke B. Harrison, Matthew P. Cheng, James M. Brophy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMinistère de la SantéFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociaux
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Bayesian probabilitySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedicineVirologyComputer scienceInternal medicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The global death toll from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exceeded 2 million, and treatments to decrease mortality are needed urgently. OBJECTIVES: To examine the probabilities of a clinically meaningful reduction in mortality for remdesivir and systemic corticosteroids. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a probabilistic re-analysis of clinical trial data for corticosteroids and remdesivir in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 using a Bayesian random effects meta-analytic approach. Studies were identified from existing meta-analyses performed by the World Health Organization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Posterior probabilities of an absolute decrease in mortality compared with control patients, by subgroups based on oxygen requirements, were calculated for corticosteroids and remdesivir. Probabilities of ≥1%, ≥2% and ≥5% absolute decrease in mortality were quantified. RESULTS: For patients needing mechanical ventilation, the probability of ≥1% absolute decrease in mortality was 4% for remdesivir and 93% for corticosteroids. For patients needing supplemental oxygen without mechanical ventilation, the probability of ≥1% absolute decrease in mortality was 81% for remdesivir and 93% for dexamethasone. Finally, for patients who did not need oxygen support, the probability of ≥1% absolute decrease in mortality was 29% for remdesivir and 4% for dexamethasone. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using a Bayesian analytic approach, remdesivir had low probability of achieving a clinically meaningful reduction in mortality, except for patients needing supplemental oxygen without mechanical ventilation. Corticosteroids were more promising for patients needing oxygen support, especially mechanical ventilation. While awaiting more definitive studies, this probabilistic interpretation of the evidence will help to guide treatment decisions for clinicians, as well as guideline and policy makers.

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)0.110
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1100.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.036
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.389 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207