Machine learning models predict long COVID outcomes based on baseline clinical and immunologic factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC), also known as long COVID, remain a significant health issue that is incompletely understood. Predicting which acutely infected individuals will go on to develop long COVID is challenging due to the lack of established biomarkers, clear disease mechanisms, or well-defined sub-phenotypes. Machine learning (ML) models offer the potential to address this by leveraging clinical data to enhance diagnostic precision. We utilized clinical data, including antibody titers and viral load measurements collected at the time of hospital admission, to predict the likelihood of acute COVID-19 progressing to long COVID. Our machine learning models achieved median AUROC values ranging from 0.64 to 0.66 and AUPRC values between 0.51 and 0.54, demonstrating their predictive capabilities. Feature importance analysis revealed that low antibody titers and high viral loads at hospital admission were the strongest predictors of long COVID outcomes. Comorbidities, including chronic respiratory, cardiac, and neurologic diseases, as well as female sex, were also identified as significant risk factors for long COVID. Our findings suggest that ML models have the potential to identify patients at risk for developing long COVID based on baseline clinical characteristics. These models can help guide early interventions, improving patient outcomes and mitigating the long-term public health impacts of SARS-CoV-2.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".