A Population-Based Outcome-Wide Association Study of the Comorbidities and Sequelae Following COVID-19 Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immense attention has been given to the outcome of COVID-19 infection. However, comprehensive studies based on large populational cohort with long-term follow-up are still lacking. This study aimed to investigate the risk of various short-term comorbidities (within one month) and long-term sequelae (above one month) after COVID-19 infection. METHODS: In this large prospective cohort study with 14 months follow-up information based on UK biobank, we included 16,776 COVID-19-positive participants and 58,281 COVID-19-negative participants matched for comparison. The risk of each comorbidity and sequela was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression analysis and presented as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: COVID-19-positive individuals had a higher risk of 47 types of comorbidities within one month following COVID-19 infection, especially those who were older, male, overweight/obese, ever-smoked, with more pre-existing comorbidities and hospitalized. About 70.37% of COVID-19 patients with comorbidities had more than one co-occurring comorbidities. Additionally, only 6 high-risk sequelae were observed after one month of COVID-19 infection, and the incidence was relatively low (< 1%). CONCLUSION: In addition to long-term sequelae following COVID-19 infection, plenty of comorbidities were observed, especially in patients with older age, male gender, overweight/obese, more pre-existing comorbidities and severe COVID-19, indicating that more attention should be given to these susceptible persons within this period.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".