Factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 test positivity in long-term care homes: A population-based cohort analysis using machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: SARS-Cov-2 infection rates are high among residents of long-term care (LTC) homes. We used machine learning to identify resident and community characteristics predictive of SARS-Cov-2 infection. METHODS: We linked 26 population-based health and administrative databases to identify the population of all LTC residents tested for SARS-Cov-2 infection in Ontario, Canada. Using ensemble-based algorithms, we examined 484 factors, including individual-level demographics, healthcare use, comorbidities, functional status, and laboratory results; and community-level characteristics to identify factors predictive of infection. Analyses were performed separately for January to April (early wave 1) and May to August (late wave 1). FINDINGS: Among 80,784 LTC residents, 64,757 (80.2%) were tested for SARS-Cov-2 (median age 86 (78-91) years, 30.6% male), of whom 10.2% of 33,519 and 5.2% of 31,238 tested positive in early and late wave 1, respectively. In the late phase (when restriction of visitors, closure of communal spaces, and universal masking in LTC were routine), regional-level characteristics comprised 33 of the top 50 factors associated with testing positive, while laboratory values and comorbidities were also predictive. The c-index of the final model was 0.934, and sensitivity was 0.887. In the highest versus lowest risk quartiles, the odds ratio for infection was 114.3 (95% CI 38.6-557.3). LTC-related geographic variations existed in the distribution of observed infection rates and the proportion of residents at highest risk. INTERPRETATION: Machine learning informed evaluation of predicted and observed risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection at the resident and LTC levels, and may inform initiatives to improve care quality in this setting. FUNDING: Funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research, COVID-19 Rapid Research Funding Opportunity grant (# VR4 172736) and a Peter Munk Cardiac Centre Innovation Grant. Dr. D. Lee is the Ted Rogers Chair in Heart Function Outcomes, University Health Network, University of Toronto. Dr. Austin is supported by a Mid-Career investigator award from the Heart and Stroke Foundation. Dr. McAlister is supported by an Alberta Health Services Chair in Cardiovascular Outcomes Research. Dr. Kaul is the CIHR Sex and Gender Science Chair and the Heart & Stroke Chair in Cardiovascular Research. Dr. Rochon holds the RTO/ERO Chair in Geriatric Medicine from the University of Toronto. Dr. B. Wang holds a CIFAR AI chair at the Vector Institute.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".