Comparing the 30-Day Mortality for Hip Fractures in Patients with and without COVID-19: An Updated Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the 30-day mortality of hip fractures during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess mortality rates by country. We systematically searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to November 2022 for studies on the 30-day mortality of hip fractures during the pandemic. Two reviewers used the Newcastle–Ottawa tool to independently assess the methodological quality of the included studies. We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review including 40 eligible studies with 17,753 patients with hip fractures, including 2280 patients with COVID-19 (12.8%). The overall 30-day mortality rate for hip fractures during the pandemic was 12.6% from published studies. The 30-day mortality of patients with hip fractures who had COVID-19 was significantly higher than those without COVID-19 (OR, 7.10; 95% CI, 5.51–9.15; I2 = 57%). The hip fracture mortality rate increased during the pandemic and varied by country, with the highest rates found in Europe, particularly the United Kingdom (UK) and Spain. COVID-19 may have contributed to the increased 30-day mortality rate in hip fracture patients. The mortality rate of hip fracture in patients without COVID-19 did not change during the pandemic.
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 | 0.019 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.065 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".