Dehydration is associated with production of organic osmolytes and predicts physical long-term symptoms after COVID-19: a multicenter cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We have previously shown that iatrogenic dehydration is associated with a shift to organic osmolyte production in the general ICU population. The aim of the present investigation was to determine the validity of the physiological response to dehydration known as aestivation and its relevance for long-term disease outcome in COVID-19. METHODS: The study includes 374 COVID-19 patients from the Pronmed cohort admitted to the ICU at Uppsala University Hospital. Dehydration data was available for 165 of these patients and used for the primary analysis. Validation was performed in Biobanque Québécoise de la COVID-19 (BQC19) using 1052 patients with dehydration data. Dehydration was assessed through estimated osmolality (eOSM = 2Na + 2 K + glucose + urea), and correlated to important endpoints including death, invasive mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and long COVID-19 symptom score grouped by physical or mental. RESULTS: Increasing eOSM was correlated with increasing role of organic osmolytes for eOSM, while the proportion of sodium and potassium of eOSM were inversely correlated to eOSM. Acute outcomes were associated with pronounced dehydration, and physical long-COVID was more strongly associated with dehydration than mental long-COVID after adjustment for age, sex, and disease severity. Metabolomic analysis showed enrichment of amino acids among metabolites that showed an aestivating pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Dehydration during acute COVID-19 infection causes an aestivation response that is associated with protein degradation and physical long-COVID. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered à priori (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04316884 registered on 2020-03-13 and NCT04474249 registered on 2020-06-29).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".