Systematic review: cystic fibrosis in the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".