MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212784128 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v5i4.1697

Validating the QCOVID risk prediction algorithm for risk of mortality from COVID-19 in the adult population in Wales, UK.

2022· article· en· W4212784128 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jane Lyons, Vahé Nafilyan, Ashley Akbari, Gareth Davies, Rowena Griffiths, Ewen M. Harrison, Julia Hippisley‐Cox, Joe Hollinghurst, Kamlesh Khunti, Laura North, Aziz Sheikh, Ronan A Lyons, Fatemeh Torabi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune responses and vaccinations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research CentreEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilWelsh Ambulance Services NHS TrustHealth and Social Care Research and Development DivisionPublic Health AgencyQueen's University BelfastWales Institute of Social and Economic Research and DataUniversity of OxfordQueen's UniversityEconomic and Social Research CouncilSwansea UniversityUniversity of LeicesterMedical Research CouncilDepartment of Health and Social CareQueen Mary University of LondonNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchScottish GovernmentChief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care DirectoratePublic Health WalesWellcome TrustUniversity College LondonBritish Heart FoundationLlywodraeth CymruCardiff UniversityLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineUK Research and InnovationHealth and Care Research WalesImperial College London
KeywordsMedicinePopulationBrier scoreRetrospective cohort studyDemographyCohortCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cohort studyPandemicRisk assessmentAlgorithmComputer scienceMachine learningDiseaseEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionCOVID-19 risk prediction algorithms can be used to identify at-risk individuals from short-term serious adverse COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalisation and death. It is important to validate these algorithms in different and diverse populations to help guide risk management decisions and target vaccination and treatment programs to the most vulnerable individuals in society. ObjectivesTo validate externally the QCOVID risk prediction algorithm that predicts mortality outcomes from COVID-19 in the adult population of Wales, UK. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected individual-level data held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. The cohort included individuals aged between 19 and 100 years, living in Wales on 24th January 2020, registered with a SAIL-providing general practice, and followed-up to death or study end (28th July 2020). Demographic, primary and secondary healthcare, and dispensing data were used to derive all the predictor variables used to develop the published QCOVID algorithm. Mortality data were used to define time to confirmed or suspected COVID-19 death. Performance metrics, including R2 values (explained variation), Brier scores, and measures of discrimination and calibration were calculated for two periods (24th January–30th April 2020 and 1st May–28th July 2020) to assess algorithm performance. Results1,956,760 individuals were included. 1,192 (0.06%) and 610 (0.03%) COVID-19 deaths occurred in the first and second time periods, respectively. The algorithms fitted the Welsh data and population well, explaining 68.8% (95% CI: 66.9-70.4) of the variation in time to death, Harrell’s C statistic: 0.929 (95% CI: 0.921-0.937) and D statistic: 3.036 (95% CI: 2.913-3.159) for males in the first period. Similar results were found for females and in the second time period for both sexes. ConclusionsThe QCOVID algorithm developed in England can be used for public health risk management for the adult Welsh population.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicImmune responses and vaccinationsFrench-language works237,207