MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307037098 · doi:10.2196/35025

Effect of Comorbidities on the Infection Rate and Severity of COVID-19: Nationwide Cohort Study With Propensity Score Matching

2022· article· en· W4307037098 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiyong Kim, Seong Hun Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityPropensity score matchingMedicaidCohortIntensive care unitCohort studyInternal medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severity of illnessEmergency medicineIntensive care medicinePediatricsHealth careDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A vaccine against COVID-19 has been developed; however, COVID-19 transmission continues. Although there have been many studies of comorbidities that have important roles in COVID-19, some studies have reported contradictory results. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted using real-world data from COVID-19 patients in South Korea and aimed to investigate the impact of patient demographics and comorbidities on the infection rate and severity of COVID-19. METHODS: Data were derived from a nationwide South Korean COVID-19 cohort study with propensity score (PS) matching. We included infected individuals who were COVID-19-positive between January 1, 2020, and May 30, 2020, and PS-matched uninfected controls. PS matching was performed to balance the baseline characteristics of each comorbidity and to adjust for potential confounders, such as age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, medication, and other comorbidities, that were matched with binary variables. The outcomes were the confirmed comorbidities affecting the infection rate and severity of COVID-19. The endpoints were COVID-19 positivity and severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 (such as tracheostomy, continuous renal replacement therapy, intensive care unit admission, ventilator use, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and death). RESULTS: The COVID-19 cohort with PS matching included 8070 individuals with positive COVID-19 test results and 8070 matched controls. The proportions of patients in the severe group were higher for individuals 60 years or older (severe clinical outcomes for those 60 years or older, 16.52%; severe clinical outcomes for those of other ages, 2.12%), those insured with Medicaid (Medicaid, 10.81%; other insurance, 5.61%), and those with disabilities (with disabilities, 18.26%; without disabilities, 5.07%). The COVID-19 infection rate was high for patients with pulmonary disease (odds ratio [OR] 1.88; 95% CI 1.70-2.03), dementia (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.40-2.20), gastrointestinal disease (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.62-1.88), stroke (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.23-2.27), hepatobiliary disease (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.19-1.44), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.16-1.43), and cardiovascular disease (OR 1.20; 95% CI 1.07-1.35). In contrast, it was lower for individuals with hyperlipidemia (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.67-0.80), autoimmune disease (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60-0.89), and cancer (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.62-0.86). The severity of COVID-19 was high for individuals with kidney disease (OR 5.59; 95% CI 2.48-12.63), hypertension (OR 2.92; 95% CI 1.91-4.47), dementia (OR 2.92; 95% CI 1.91-4.47), cancer (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.15-2.94), pulmonary disease (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.35-2.19), cardiovascular disease (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.17-2.04), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.09-1.87), and psychotic disorders (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.01-6.52). However, it was low for those with hyperlipidemia (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.60-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Upon PS matching considering the use of statins, it was concluded that people with hyperlipidemia could have lower infection rates and disease severity of COVID-19.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207