MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4280636779 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2022.100272

Paediatric critical COVID-19 and mortality in a multinational prospective cohort

2022· article· en· W4280636779 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastián González‐Dambrauskas, Pablo Vásquez‐Hoyos, Anna Camporesi, Edwin Mauricio Cantillano, Samantha Dallefeld, Jesús Domínguez-Rojas, Conall Francoeur, Anar Gurbanov, Liliana Mazzillo Vega, Steven L. Shein, Adriana Yock‐Corrales, Todd Karsies, Ryan A. Nofziger, Shashikanth Ambati, Tanıl Kendirli, Ronald C. Sanders, Lee Polikoff, Siobhan Whelan, Francisca Castro, Claudia Beltrán-Arroyave, Rosalba Pardo, Gonzalo Vega, Mauricio Yunge, Lorena Acevedo, Ivan Jose Ardila, Diego Aránguiz, Martha I. Álvarez-Olmos, Jaime Fernández‐Sarmiento, Arieth Figueroa-Vargas, Maribel Valencia-Benavides, Juan D. Roa, Rubén Eduardo Lasso Palomino, Alessia Franceschi, Carina Venthur, Camila Ampuero, Jhovana E. Paco-Barral, Jaime Tasayco-Muñoz, Francisca Rafael-Patricio, Solana Pellegrini, Marcela Zuazaga, Silvana Brusca, M. A. Hernández Viera, Vladmir Ivan Aguilera-Avendano, Franklin Alejandro, L. Martínez, E. Thelma, María Eugenia Terán, Mariela Coronado-Lujan, Fabiola Castro-Mancilla, Franco Díaz, Karina Cinquegrana, Alicia Sandoval, Andrea González, Marta Zamora, Yúrika López-Alarcón, María Slöcker-Barrio, Javier Urbano-Villaescusa, Humberto Camacho, Liliana Mazzillo, Beatriz F. Giraldo, Pitas Suarez, M. Céspedes-Lesczinsky, Jorge Omar Castillo, Juan Pablo Fabris, Carolina Paladino, Silvia Sanabria, Erika Urena-Chavarría, Gaudi Quispe, Manuel Eduardo Munaico Abanto, Miriam Giovanna Colombo, Ana Carola Blanco, Byron Enrique Piñeres-Olave, Ricardo Carvajal-Veas, Patrícia Correa, Ricardo Garcia-De-Jesus, Arani Ferre, P. Pietroboni, Edwin Mauricio-Cantillano, Linda Banegas-Pineda, Nils Casson-Rodriguez, Agustín Cavagnaro, Adriana Wegner, Eliana Zemanate, Emilce Beltran-Zuñiga, María Alejandra Suarez, Deyanira Quiñonez, Alejandra Repetur, Pablo Castellani, Adriana Bordogna, Alfredo De-la-Hoz-Pastor, Evelyn Obando-Belalcazar, Andrew Prout, Roberto Jabornisky, Andy Wen, Bria M. Coates, Christopher M. Watson, Elizabeth H. Mack, Jahee Hong, Steven Pon, Heda Dapul, Murat Kanğın, Shira J. Gertz, Laurence Ducharme-Crevier, Ilana Harwayne‐Gidansky, Marisol Fonseca-Flores, Juan Carlos Núñez-Enríquez, Armando Leon-Villanueva, Ledys Maria, Teddy Muisyo, Michael C. Spaeder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Multinational corporation2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Critical illnessProspective cohort studyMedicineCohortCohort studyIntensive care medicineVirologyPolitical scienceInternal medicineCritically illOutbreakDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives To understand the international epidemiology of critical pediatric COVID-19 and compare presentation, treatments, and outcomes of younger (<2 years) and older (>2 years) children. Design Prospective, observational study from April 1 to December 31, 2020 Setting International multicenter study from 55 sites from North America, Latin America, and Europe. Participants Patients <19 years old hospitalized with critical COVID-19 Interventions none Main outcomes measured Clinical course, treatments, and outcomes were compared between younger and older children. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for hospital mortality. Results 557 subjects (median age, 8 years; 24% <2 years) were enrolled from 55 sites (63% Latin American). Half had comorbidities. Younger children had more respiratory findings (56% vs 44%), viral pneumonia (45% vs 29%), and treatment with invasive ventilation (50% vs 37). Gastrointestinal (28% vs 69%) or mucocutaneous (16% vs 44%) findings, vasopressor requirement (44% vs 60%), and MIS-C (15% vs 40%) were less common in younger children. Hospital mortality was 10% overall but 15% in younger children (odds ratio 1.89 [95%CI 1.05-3.39]). When adjusted for age, sex, region, and illness severity, mortality-associated factors included cardiac (aOR 2.6; 95%CI 1.07-6.31) or pulmonary comorbidities (aOR 4.4; 95%CI 1.68-11.5), admission hypoxemia (aOR 2.33; 95%CI 1.24-4.37), and lower respiratory symptoms (aOR 2.83; 95%CI 1.49-5.39). Gastrointestinal (aOR 0.49; 95%CI 0.26-0.92) or mucocutaneous symptoms (aOR 0.31; 95%CI 0.15-0.64), treatment with intravenous immune globulin (aOR 0.33; 95%CI 0.17-0.65), and MIS-C (aOR 0.26; 95%CI 0.11-0.64) were associated with lower mortality. Conclusions We identified age-related differences in presentation and mortality for critical pediatric COVID-19 that should prompt more attention to improving management in younger children, especially in developing countries. Table of Contents Summary This is a multinational study describing critical pediatric COVID-19 clinical spectrum and related mortality in high and low-middle income countries during 2020. What’s known on this subject Pediatric critical illness due to COVID-19 is uncommon and have lower mortality compared to adults when hospitalized. While larger cohorts are from high-income countries (HICs), studies including data from low-middle-income countries (LMICs) remain scarce. What this study adds In our multinational cohort of critical pediatric COVID-19, we identified higher mortality than previously reported and age-related disease patterns. Children <2 years old had more respiratory disease and higher mortality, and older children had more non-pulmonary disease and better outcomes.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations56
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas→Same topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies→French-language works237,207→