Association between initial symptoms and subsequent hospitalization in outpatients with COVID-19: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Most individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience mild symptoms and are managed in the outpatient setting. The aim of this study was to determine whether self-reported symptoms at the time of diagnosis can identify patients at risk of clinical deterioration. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of 671 outpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosed in Toronto between March 1 and October 16, 2020. We examined the association between patients' baseline characteristics and self-reported symptoms at the time of diagnosis and the risk of subsequent hospitalization. Results: Of 671 participants, 26 (3.9%) required hospitalization. Individuals aged 65 years or older were more likely to require hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 5.29, 95% CI 2.19 to 12.77), whereas those without medical comorbidities were unlikely to be hospitalized (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.17). After adjusting for age and presence of comorbidities, sputum production (adjusted OR [aOR] 5.01, 95% CI 1.97 to 12.75), arthralgias (aOR 4.82, 95% CI 1.85 to 12.53), diarrhea (aOR 4.56, 95% CI 1.82 to 11.42), fever (aOR 3.64, 95% CI 1.50 to 8.82), chills (aOR 3.62, 95% CI 1.54 to 8.50), and fatigue (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 1.04 to 6.47) were associated with subsequent hospitalization. Conclusions: Early assessment of symptoms among outpatients with COVID-19 can help identify individuals at risk of clinical deterioration. Additional studies are needed to determine whether more intense follow-up and early intervention among high-risk individuals can alter the clinical trajectory of and outcomes among outpatients with COVID-19.
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 | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| 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".