MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S1059 The Incidence of COVID-19 in Patients With Metabolic Syndrome and Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis: A Population-Based Study

2020· article· en· W3212988610 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Ghoneim, Muhammad Butt, Osama Hamid, Aun R. Shah, Ganesh Ram, Nicholas C. Wu, Imad Asaad

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetabolic syndromeSteatohepatitisDyslipidemiaFatty liverInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusIncidence (geometry)PopulationObesityDiseaseUnivariate analysisGastroenterologyEndocrinologyMultivariate analysisEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) emerged from China in 2019 and rapidly spread worldwide. Patients with metabolic comorbid conditions are more susceptible to COVID-19. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the hepatic manifestation of metabolic syndrome, with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) representing a severe form of NAFLD. The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between metabolic syndrome components and the risk of COVID-19. METHODS: We reviewed data from a large commercial database (Explorys IBM) that aggregates electronic health records from 26 large nationwide healthcare systems. We identified adult with the diagnosis of metabolic syndrome and its components from 1999 to 2019. Patients with the diagnosis of COVID-19 from December 2019 to May 2020 were identified. Comorbidities known to be associated with COVID-19 and metabolic syndrome such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, smoking, gender, race, and hypertension were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to investigate whether metabolic syndrome or its individual components are independently associated with the risk of COVID-19. RESULTS: Out of 61.4 million patients, 8,885 (0.01%) had documented COVID-19 infection. Using univariate analysis, patients with metabolic syndrome had a higher cumulative incidence of COVID-19 than those without (0.10% vs 0.01%, OR 7.00 [6.11–8.01). Patients had increased risk if they were diagnosed with hypertension (0.04% vs 0.01%, OR 5.81 [5.57–6.07]), diabetes (0.05% vs 0.01%, OR 4.88 [4.67–5.10]), dyslipidemia (0.04% vs 0.01%, OR 4.22 [4.05–4.40]) or obesity (0.06% vs 0.01%, OR 6.13 [5.86–6.40]). African Americans had a higher risk of COVID-19 (0.07% vs 0.01%, OR 9.20 [8.82–9.59]), but the risk was lower if they were male (0.02% vs 0.01%, OR 0.85 [0.81–0.89]). The overall risk of COVID-19 was the highest in those diagnosed with NASH (0.20% vs 0.01%, OR 14.10 [11.63–17.10]). The adjusted odds (aOR) of having COVID-19 was higher if patients were African American (OR 7.45 [7.14–7.77]), hypertensive (aOR 2.53 [2.40–2.68]), obese (aOR 2.20 [2.10 2.32]), diabetic (aOR 1.41 [1.33–1.48]) had dyslipidemia (OR 1.70 [1.56–1.74]) or NASH (OR 4.93 [4.05–6.00]).The adjusted odds of having COVID-19 was also lower in males compared to females (aOR 0.88 [0.84–0.92]). CONCLUSION: The incidence of COVID-19 in patients with metabolic syndrome is high. Among all comorbid metabolic conditions, NASH has the strongest association with COVID-19.Table 1.: Baseline Characteristics of Study PopulationTable 2.: Multivariable model with COVID-19 being the dependent variable. Abbreviation: OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence intervalFigure 1.: Forest plot showing adjusted odds ratio of having COVID-19. The dots represent the odds ratio and the horizontal line represents the 95% confidence interval.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→