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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".