Haematological predictors of poor outcome among COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies from Asia, Europe and the USA indicate that widely available haematological parameters could be used to determine the clinical severity of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and predict management outcome. There is limited data from Africa on their usefulness in patients admitted to Intensive Care Units (ICUs). We performed an evaluation of baseline haematological parameters as prognostic biomarkers in ICU COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected prospectively on patients with confirmed COVID-19, admitted to the adult ICU in a tertiary hospital in Cape Town, South Africa, between March 2020 and February 2021. Robust Poisson regression methods and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to explore the association of haematological parameters with COVID-19 severity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 490 patients (median age 54.1 years) were included, of whom 237 (48%) were female. The median duration of ICU stay was 6 days and 309/490 (63%) patients died. Raised neutrophil count and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were associated with worse outcome. Independent risk factors associated with mortality were age (ARR 1.01, 95%CI 1.0-1.02; p = 0.002); female sex (ARR 1.23, 95%CI 1.05-1.42; p = 0.008) and D-dimer levels (ARR 1.01, 95%CI 1.002-1.03; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that raised neutrophil count, NLR and D-dimer at the time of ICU admission were associated with higher mortality. Contrary to what has previously been reported, our study revealed females admitted to the ICU had a higher risk of mortality.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".