MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385956136 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071346

WHO O2CoV2: oxygen requirements and respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 in low-and-middle income countries—protocol for a multicountry, prospective, observational cohort study

2023· article· en· W4385956136 on OpenAlexaff
Pryanka Relan, Srinivas Murthy, John C. Marshall, Djillali Annane, Sylvie Chevret, Yaseen M. Arabi, Wangari Waweru-Siika, Sara Dominguez Rodriguez, Pauline Convocar, Janet Dı́az

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWellcome TrustWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyOxygen therapyPandemicPopulationModalitiesPsychological interventionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Family medicineIntensive care medicineEnvironmental healthDiseaseInternal medicineNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 has been identified as the cause of the disease officially named COVID-19, primarily a respiratory illness. COVID-19 was characterised as a pandemic on 11 March 2020. It has been estimated that approximately 20% of people with COVID-19 require oxygen therapy. Oxygen has been listed on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines List and Essential Medicines List for Children for almost two decades. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted, more than ever, the acute need for scale-up of oxygen therapy. Detailed data on the use of oxygen therapy in low-and-middle income countries at the patient and facility level are needed to target interventions better globally. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We aim to describe the requirements and use of oxygen at the facility and patient level of approximately 4500 patients with COVID-19 in 30 countries. Our objectives are specifically to characterise type and duration of different modalities of oxygen therapy delivered to patients; describe demographics and outcomes of hospitalised patients with COVID-19; and describe facility-level oxygen production and support. Primary analyses will be descriptive in nature. Respiratory support transitions will be described in Sankey plots, and Kaplan-Meier models will be used to estimate probability of each transition. A multistate model will be used to study the course of hospital stay of the study population, evaluating transitions of escalating respiratory support transitions to the absorbing states. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: WHO Ad Hoc COVID-19 Research Ethics Review Committee (ERC) has approved this global protocol. When this protocol is adopted at specific country sites, national ERCs may make require adjustments in accordance with their respective national research ethics guidelines. Dissemination of this protocol and global findings will be open access through peer-reviewed scientific journals, study website, press and online media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04918875.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→