MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

19. Association between Genotype Variation with COVID-19 Severity in Hypertensive Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4400547789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rido Maulana, Ignatius Ivan, Bayushi Eka P, Renan Sukmawan, Bambang Widyantoro, Muhammad Fajri Adda’i, Anwar Santoso

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GenotypeSystematic review2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVariation (astronomy)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Internal medicineMEDLINEVirologyDiseaseGeneticsOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Genetic variations in ACE and ACE2 genes influence COVID-19 severity. Reduced ACE2 availability and increased ACE activity can elevate Angiotensin-II (AngII), contributing to COVID-19-related inflammation. Objective: We aim to assess the relationship between genetic variations and the severity of COVID-19 in individuals with hypertension. Method: We followed the 2020 PRISMA guidelines for reporting. We searched Cochrane Library, ProQuest, PubMed, LILACS, ScienceDirect, Springer, and Taylor & Francis from inception to September 24, 2023. Eligible studies included adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 and hypertension (SBP ≥ 140 and/or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg), employing observational designs, providing data on genetic variations in ACE1, ACE2, or relevant polymorphisms. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.1. Result: We found three case-control studies and one cross-sectional study, generating eight reports in total. The pooled analysis of severe COVID-19 in hypertensive patients with ACE1 polymorphism revealed significant associations in the allele (OR: 2.52; 95%CI, 1.31-4.83; p=0.005), additive (OR: 4.30; 95%CI, 1.04-17.73; p=0.04), and dominant (OR: 2.65; 95%CI, 1.41-4.97; p=0.002) models. Conversely, a protective role against severe COVID-19 in hypertensive patients was indicated in the recessive model (OR: 0.24; 95%CI, 0.07-0.87; p=0.03). Other results yieled no significant association with COVID-19 severity. NOS score for case-controls are 6-8 and cross-sectional are 10. Conclusion: Our analysis linked ACE1 I/D polymorphism to severe COVID-19 in hypertensive individuals, with no significant relationship observed for ACE2 polymorphism. Additional research is needed given the limited relevant studies.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.045
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207