MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160797969 · doi:10.1186/s12890-021-01528-0

Systematic review: cystic fibrosis in the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic

2021· review· en· W3160797969 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pulmonary Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCystic fibrosisPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intensive care medicineIncidence (geometry)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)DiseaseImmunologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the development of life-threatening COVID-19 are believed to disproportionately affect certain at-risk populations. However, it is not clear whether individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) are at a higher risk of COVID-19 or its adverse consequences. Recurrent respiratory viral infections are often associated with perturbation and pulmonary exacerbations of CF as evidenced by the significant morbidity observed in CF individuals during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. The primary goal of this review was to systematically survey published accounts of COVID-19 in CF and determine if individuals with CF are disproportionally affected by SARS-CoV-2 and development of COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search using EMBASE and Medline between April 28 and December 10, 2020. Six evaluable studies reporting on a total of 339 individuals with CF who developed COVID-19 were included in this study. RESULTS: We found that although individuals with CF generally experience acute exacerbations of lung disease from infectious agents, COVID-19 incidence estimates in CF appear to be lower than in the general population. However, there are reports of subsets of CF, such as those who had organ transplants, that may experience a more severe COVID-19 course. Potential protective mechanisms in the CF population include pre-pandemic social isolation practices, infection prevention and control knowledge, altered expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme, and the use of certain medications. CONCLUSIONS: Although individuals with CF are at risk of acute exacerbations often precipitated by respiratory tract viral infections, published evidence to date indicated that individuals with CF do not experience higher risks of contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, there is evidence that some subsets within the CF population, including those post-transplantation, may experience a more severe clinical course. As SARS-CoV-2 variants are identified and the pandemic goes through additional waves of disease outbreaks, ongoing monitoring of the risk of COVID-19 in individuals with CF is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.307 · 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