MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377564982 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2023.1170331

Unraveling complex relationships between COVID-19 risk factors using machine learning based models for predicting mortality of hospitalized patients and identification of high-risk group: a large retrospective study

2023· article· en· W4377564982 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Mehdi Banoei, Haniyeh Rafiepoor, Kazem Zendehdel, Monireh Sadat Seyyedsalehi, Azin Nahvijou, Farshad Allameh, Saeid Amanpour

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health ServicesCancer Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseRetrospective cohort studySeverity of illnessPandemicInternal medicineCorrelationMortality rateCohortIntensive care medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: At the end of 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased the hospital burden of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-Cov-2 and became the most significant health challenge for nations worldwide. The severity and high mortality of COVID-19 have been correlated with various demographic characteristics and clinical manifestations. Prediction of mortality rate, identification of risk factors, and classification of patients played a crucial role in managing COVID-19 patients. Our purpose was to develop machine learning (ML)-based models for the prediction of mortality and severity among patients with COVID-19. Identifying the most important predictors and unraveling their relationships by classification of patients to the low-, moderate- and high-risk groups might guide prioritizing treatment decisions and a better understanding of interactions between factors. A detailed evaluation of patient data is believed to be important since COVID-19 resurgence is underway in many countries. Results: = 0.24) to separate survivors and non-survivors. Oxygen saturation level, loss of consciousness, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were the top mortality predictors. Correlation analysis showed different correlation patterns among predictors for each non-survivor and survivor cohort separately. The main prediction model was verified using other ML-based analyses with a high area under the curve (AUC) (0.81-0.93) and specificity (0.94-0.99). The obtained data revealed that the mortality prediction model can be different for males and females with diverse predictors. Patients were classified into four clusters of mortality risk and identified the patients at the highest risk of mortality, which accentuated the most significant predictors correlating with mortality. Conclusion: An ML model for predicting mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients was developed considering the interactions between factors that may reduce the complexity of clinical decision-making processes. The most predictive factors related to patient mortality were identified by assessing and classifying patients into different groups based on their sex and mortality risk (low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIFrench-language works237,207