Association between Statin Use and Poor Outcomes in COVID-19 Patientswith Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, obesity, and dyslipidaemia are considered risk factors for more severe forms of COVID-19 infection. Statins have been widely used in such patients to prevent the occurrence of cardiovascular events and the associated mortality. However, statin use has been suggested to promote a more severe form of infection. This review aims to investigate the association between statin use and poor outcomes in COVID-19 patients with diabetes. METHODS: Literature search was performed in PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, and pre-print databases (MedRxiv and BioRxiv), and studies published up to March 6th, 2021 have been reviewed. Selected studies were then assessed for risk of bias with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULT: Four studies were included in the final analysis; all were retrospective studies. Two studies reported a decreased risk of mortality with statin use, while one study reported opposite findings. The other one did not find a significant association between statin use and poor COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSION: Available data suggest that statins may be safely administered to diabetic COVID-19 patients as the majority of evidence signifies statins to confer benefits and improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19 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.
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 | 0.012 | 0.394 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it