S673 Outcome of Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) management due to concerns regarding aerosolization during endoscopy and patient hesitancy in presenting to hospital. The impact of the pandemic on UGIB outcomes is not well described. Methods: We described adults with UGIB admitted to general medicine services or intensive care units (ICU) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1–June 30 2020) at 7 hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Ontario. The historical control group consisted of patients admitted to these hospitals from March 1-June 30, 2018 and March 1-June 30, 2019. We compared primary (in-hospital mortality) and secondary outcomes (ICU utilization, transfusion requirements, persistent bleeding, and need for angiographic/surgical management of bleeding) using multivariable regression models, controlling for patient demographic factors, comorbidities, severity and etiology of bleeding, and admitting hospital. Results: There were 363 admissions for UGIB from March 1-June 30, 2020 (COVID-19 period) and 950 admissions from March 1-June 30 2018 and 2019 (historical control period). There were no differences between the two groups with respect to baseline variables of age, sex, underlying cirrhosis, Charlson comorbidity index, and the modified Glasgow-Blatchford and pre-endoscopy Rockall mortality risk scores (Table 1). Patients in the COVID-19 time period were less likely to undergo endoscopy (64% vs. 71%, p=0.015). There were no differences between the two groups for the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality or any secondary outcomes (Table 1). On multivariable analysis, patients admitted with UGIB during the COVID-19 time period did not have greater in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]=0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-1.57), or any differences in ICU utilization, number of red blood cell units transfused, persistent bleeding, and angiographic/surgical management. Conclusion: Although fewer patients admitted to hospital with UGIB during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic received endoscopy, there was no difference in clinical outcomes.Table 1.: Comparison of Inpatient Outcomes of NVUGIB Patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".