Association between ABO blood groups and rhesus antigen and susceptibility to COVID-19 in the Yazd hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood group antigens are one of the most important antigens in humans that have an impact on susceptibility to disease and may be used as a prognosis factor in different diseases such as COVID-19. The study aimed to investigate the relationship between ABO blood groups and Rhesus antigen and susceptibility to COVID-19. The clinical data of 398 subjects were used in the investigation collected from 148 cases vs. 250 controls. This information was obtained from Shahid Sadoughi Hospital of Yazd (IRAN) University. Blood groups and outcomes were assessed using statistical tests for four populations: COV + vs. COV- and COV +/deceased vs. COV +/live. Out of a total of 148 COVID-19 patients, 80 (54/1%) were male, 68 (45/9%) were female. Among these patients, 33 (22/6%) had type A+, 44 (30/1%) had type B+, 13 (8/9%) had type AB+, and 36 (24/7%) had type O+. On the other hand, out of 148 patients, 126 (86/3%) had positive blood types, and 20 (13/7%) had negative blood types. As a result, no significant difference was found in the relationship between ABO blood groups and RH type and susceptibility to COVID-19 (p-value = 0.392 and p-value = 0.847, respectively). Other data showed a significant difference between patients group with other parameters such as age (p-value<0.001) and gender (p-value<0.001). Although in this study there was no association between blood type and RH type with COVID-19, findings of the association between age and gender can confirm the results of previous studies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".