MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404948870 · doi:10.1101/2024.12.02.24317727

Risk of Severe Outcomes From COVID-19 in Comorbid Populations in the Omicron Era: A Meta-analysis

2024· preprint· en· W4404948870 on OpenAlexaff
Dan H. Barouch, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Triantafyllos Pliakas, Eva Polverino, Harald Sourij, Sultan Abdul-Jawad

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisComorbidityHazard ratioDiabetes mellitusOdds ratioMEDLINEConfidence intervalInternal medicineObservational studySystematic reviewCOPDRelative riskIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Importance This is the first meta-analysis to investigate risk of death and hospitalization in individuals with comorbidities, specifically during the Omicron era. Objective To assess the risk of mortality and hospitalization from COVID-19 in individuals with comorbidities in comparison with individuals without comorbidities during the Omicron era. Data Sources A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Europe PMC, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and WHO COVID-19 Database was performed to identify studies published between 1 January 2022 and 13 March 2024. Study Selection Inclusion criteria were observational studies including people (all ages) with at least 1 of the following comorbidities: cardiovascular/ cerebrovascular disease, chronic lung conditions, diabetes, and obesity. In total, 72 studies were included in the review, of which 68 were meta-analyzed. Data Extraction and Synthesis Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second. Studies were synthesized quantitively (meta-analysis) using random-effect models. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Main Outcomes and Measures Evaluated outcomes were the risks of death, hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and any combination of these outcomes. Odds ratios, hazard ratios, and rate ratios were extracted; pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results Minimum numbers of participants per comorbidity across included studies ranged from 328 870 for thrombosis to 13 720 480 for hypertension. Risks of death, hospitalization, and the combined outcome were increased in individuals with cerebrovascular disease, COPD, diabetes, respiratory diseases, heart disease, and heart failure versus those without (pooled RRs ranged from 1.27 [heart disease, hospitalization; 95% CI, 1.17-1.38, P < .001] to 1.78 [heart failure, death: 95% CI, 1.46-2.16, P < .001]). Individuals with diabetes and obesity had increased risk of ICU admission (RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.04-1.38, P = .0141 and RR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.11-1.57, P = .00158, respectively). Conclusions During the Omicron era, risk of death and hospitalization from COVID-19 is increased amongst individuals with comorbidities including cerebrovascular/cardiovascular conditions, chronic lung diseases, and diabetes, with the highest risk in those with heart failure. Individuals with diabetes and obesity are at increased risk of ICU admission. Key Points Question What are the risks of severe outcomes from COVID-19 in individuals with comorbidities during the Omicron era? Findings This systematic review and meta-analysis found increased risk of mortality and hospitalization among individuals with a range of comorbidities, including cerebrovascular/cardiovascular conditions, chronic lung diseases, and diabetes, with the highest risk in those with heart failure, versus those without. Risk of ICU admission was higher in individuals with obesity and diabetes. Meaning This study identified comorbid populations most at risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19. Targeting these populations with public health measures, such as vaccination, may be beneficial.

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)0.021
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.068
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.296
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies→French-language works237,207→