MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402399184 · doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.09.001

Sex differences in the outcome of critically Ill patients with COVID-19 - An international multicenter critical care consortium study

2024· article· en· W4402399184 on OpenAlexaff
Lavienraj Premraj, Natasha Weaver, Syed A. Ahmad, Nicole White, Glenn Whitman, Rakesh C. Arora, Denise Battaglini, Jonathon P. Fanning, Heidi J. Dalton, Jacky Y. Suen, Gianluigi Li Bassi, John F. Fraser, Chiara Robba, Matthew Griffee, Sung‐Min Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart & Lung · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface Hospital
FundersFundación Bancaria Caixa d'Estalvis i Pensions de BarcelonaPrince Charles Hospital FoundationQueensland HealthQueensland GovernmentAdvance QueenslandUniversity of QueenslandEuropean CommissionBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Critically ill2019-20 coronavirus outbreakCritical illnessSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Intensive care medicineMulticenter studyOutcome (game theory)MEDLINEBetacoronavirusEmergency medicineInternal medicineVirologyRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) susceptibility, illness severity, and hospital course are widely acknowledged. The effects of sex on outcomes experienced by patients with severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of sex on ICU mortality in patients with COVID-19 METHODS: This retrospective analysis of an international multi-center prospective observational database included adults admitted to ICU for treatment of acute COVID-19 between 1st January 2020 and 30th June 2022. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Multivariable Cox regression was used to ascertain the hazard of death (Hazard Ratio=HR) adjusted for pre-selected covariates. The secondary outcome was sex differences in complications of COVID-19 during hospital stay. RESULTS: Overall, 10,259 patients (3,314 females, 6,945 males) were included with a median age of 60 (interquartile range [IQR]=49-68) and 59 (IQR=49-67) years, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between sexes. More females were non-smokers (65% vs. 44 %, p < 0.01) and obese (39% vs. 30 %, p < 0.01), compared to males. Also, males received greater ICU intervention (mechanical ventilation, prone ventilation, vasopressors, and tracheostomy) than females. Males had a greater hazard of death (compared to females, HR=1.14; 95 % CI=1.02-1.26). Adjustment for complications during hospital stay did not alter the hazard of death (HR=1.16; 95 % CI=1.05-1.28). Males had a significantly elevated hazard of death among patients who received ECMO (HR=1.24; 95 % CI=1.01-1.53). Male sex was associated with cardiac arrest (adjusted OR [aOR]=1.37; 95 % CI=1.16-1.62) and PE (aOR=1.28; 95 % CI=1.06-1.55). CONCLUSION: Among patients admitted to ICU for severe COVID-19, males experienced higher severity of illness and more frequent intervention than females. Ultimately, the hazard of death was moderately elevated in males compared to females despite greater PE and cardiac arrest.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.412 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeart & LungSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207