MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3196676340 · doi:10.2196/30083

An Early Warning Risk Prediction Tool (RECAP-V1) for Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19: Protocol for a Statistical Analysis Plan

2021· article· en· W3196676340 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesca Fiorentino, Denys Prociuk, Ana Belén Espinosa-González, Ana Luísa Neves, Laiba Husain, Sonny Christian Ramtale, Emma Mi, Ella Mi, Jack Macartney, Sneha Anand, Julian Sherlock, Kavitha Saravanakumar, Erik Mayer, Simon de Lusignan, Trisha Greenhalgh, Brendan Delaney

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreEconomic and Social Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchPatient Safety Translational Research CentreNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research CentreCancer Research UKImperial College LondonUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Protocol (science)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakWarning systemSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicinePandemicComputer scienceMedical emergencyVirologyAlternative medicineOutbreakPathologyDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts have been made to develop early warning risk scores to help clinicians decide which patient is likely to deteriorate and require hospitalization. The RECAP (Remote COVID-19 Assessment in Primary Care) study investigates the predictive risk of hospitalization, deterioration, and death of patients with confirmed COVID-19, based on a set of parameters chosen through a Delphi process performed by clinicians. We aim to use rich data collected remotely through the use of electronic data templates integrated in the electronic health systems of several general practices across the United Kingdom to construct accurate predictive models. The models will be based on preexisting conditions and monitoring data of a patient's clinical parameters (eg, blood oxygen saturation) to make reliable predictions as to the patient's risk of hospital admission, deterioration, and death. OBJECTIVE: This statistical analysis plan outlines the statistical methods to build the prediction model to be used in the prioritization of patients in the primary care setting. The statistical analysis plan for the RECAP study includes the development and validation of the RECAP-V1 prediction model as a primary outcome. This prediction model will be adapted as a three-category risk score split into red (high risk), amber (medium risk), and green (low risk) for any patient with suspected COVID-19. The model will predict the risk of deterioration and hospitalization. METHODS: After the data have been collected, we will assess the degree of missingness and use a combination of traditional data imputation using multiple imputation by chained equations, as well as more novel machine-learning approaches to impute the missing data for the final analysis. For predictive model development, we will use multiple logistic regression analyses to construct the model. We aim to recruit a minimum of 1317 patients for model development and validation. We will then externally validate the model on an independent dataset of 1400 patients. The model will also be applied for multiple different datasets to assess both its performance in different patient groups and its applicability for different methods of data collection. RESULTS: As of May 10, 2021, we have recruited 3732 patients. A further 2088 patients have been recruited through the National Health Service Clinical Assessment Service, and approximately 5000 patients have been recruited through the DoctalyHealth platform. CONCLUSIONS: The methodology for the development of the RECAP-V1 prediction model as well as the risk score will provide clinicians with a statistically robust tool to help prioritize COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04435041; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04435041. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30083.

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)0.172
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.152
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1720.152
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.018

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 head0.346
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→