MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213546438

A review of the presentation and outcome of sarcoidosis in coronavirus disease 2019.

2021· review· en· W3213546438 on OpenAlexaff
Lina James George, Anil Philip, Kevin John, Anu Anna George, Jemimah Nayar, Ajay Kumar Mishra, Amos Lal

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcoidosisObservational studyPopulationDiseasePandemicMEDLINEIntensive care unitIntensive care medicinePresentation (obstetrics)PediatricsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineSurgeryInfectious disease (medical specialty)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the setting of the current pandemic, concerns have arisen regarding the multisystemic involvement of sarcoidosis and the possible exacerbations in response to the exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. AIM: This study aims to compare the differences in clinical presentation, management, and outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between patients with sarcoidosis and those in the general population. METHODS: A literature search was conducted by reviewing original research articles such as case reports, case series, observational studies, and questionnaire-based surveys published in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Google scholar. Data from individual patients in case series and case reports have been pooled to create a data set that was compared with larger such cohorts obtained from several other observational studies. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were identified from 14 original articles. No significant differences were found in the clinical manifestations of patients with sarcoidosis presenting with COVID-19 as compared to the general population. The rate of hospitalization in our study was found to be 48.1%. The overall mortality in our study was 7.4%, which is higher than the global average of 2.1%. CONCLUSION: Our observations have reinforced the hypothesis that the presence of additional medical comorbidities is associated with a higher risk of intensive care unit admission. Furthermore, the presence of moderate to a severe limitation in pulmonary functions is an additional risk factor associated with increased hospital admissions and mortality in sarcoidosis. However, neither the diagnosis of sarcoidosis nor ongoing treatment with steroids, methotrexate, or other immunosuppressants was associated with a poorer prognosis in patients with sarcoidosis. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: Patients with sarcoidosis must take added precautions to mitigate the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection in view of the COVID-19-related mortality rate in this group of patients. Specifically, immunocompromised patients (on immunomodulator drugs and high dose steroids) have been found to have an increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Overall impact on prognostication and outcome in cases requiring hospitalization remains yet to be determined.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207