MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406923528 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofae631.2067

P-1906. Early COVID-19 and Severity of Subsequent Omicron Infection in Ontario, Canada

2025· article· en· W4406923528 on OpenAlexaffabout
Caroline Kassee, Moe H. Kyaw, Zoë Zhong, Altynay Shigayeva, Catherine Martin, Lubna Farooqi, Brenda L. Coleman, Wayne L. Gold, Christopher Kandel, Maria Major, Samira Mubareka, Srinivas Rao Valluri, John M. McLaughlin, Allison McGeer

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentrePfizer (Canada)Toronto East General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyInternal medicineOutbreakDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background As SARS-CoV-2 evolves, assessing changes in COVID-19 severity over time, and the impact of prior infection on repeat infection, is important. We determined whether developing COVID-19 early in the pandemic was associated with reduced severity of subsequent infection with Omicron sub-lineages. Methods We evaluated COVID-19 severity among patients infected during the Omicron wave. Severity was measured in 3 ways:(1) an ordinal measure combining activities of daily living (ADL) and presence of fever,(2) healthcare required (yes/no),(3) an ordinal measure of illness duration. We compared these outcomes in a study of age and time-period matched cohorts in Toronto, Canada: one with symptomatic COVID-19 between Mar 1 & Sep 30/2020 ('early COVID-19') and another who did not test positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the same period. Participants completed baseline, then biweekly surveys to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection episodes from Jan 2020 to Jan 2023. Multivariable binary and ordinal logistic regression models were used to construct ORs and 95% CI for impact of early COVID-19 on severity, adjusted for social/demographic characteristics, comorbidities, COVID-19 vaccination status, and time from early COVID-19 to first Omicron infection. Results Of 261 participants with COVID-19 due to Omicron (Table 1), 177 had early COVID-19 at a median of 26 months prior. In adjusted analyses, those with early COVID-19 occurring < 24 months prior to their Omicron infection had lower odds of having severe Omicron-related illness; OR 0.35 (95%CI 0.15-0.80); with non-significant lower odds of requirement for healthcare (OR 0.49,95%CI 0.14-1.8) and illness duration (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.32-2.0) (Table 2). Immunocompromise was associated with more severe illness based on all 3 outcomes; other non-immunocompromising comorbidities were associated with requiring healthcare and longer illness duration, and females reported longer illness duration (Table 2). Conclusion Developing COVID-19 early in the pandemic was associated with reduced severity of first Omicron infection if it occurred < 24 months later. Immunocompromise and the presence of other underlying comorbidities were associated with increased severity, and women reported longer duration of illness. Disclosures Moe H. Kyaw, PhD, Pfizer: Employee Catherine Martin, PhD, Pfizer: employee|Pfizer: Stocks/Bonds (Private Company) Maria Major, B.Sc., M.P.H., Pfizer: Employee Samira Mubareka, MD, Pfizer: Grant/Research Support Srinivas Valluri, PhD, Pfizer: Employee John M. McLaughlin, PhD, Pfizer: Employee|Pfizer: Stocks/Bonds (Public Company) Allison McGeer, MD, AstraZeneca: Honoraria|GSK: Honoraria|Merck: Honoraria|Moderna: Honoraria|Novavax: Honoraria|Pfizer: Grant/Research Support|Pfizer: Honoraria|Roche: Honoraria|Seqirus: Grant/Research Support|Seqirus: Honoraria

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207