MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414425109 · doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcaf218

Development and validation of age-specific predictive models on the risk of post-acute mortality within 1 year of COVID-19 infection

2025· article· en· W4414425109 on OpenAlexaff
Ivan Chun Hang Lam, Jiayi Zhou, Wenlong Liu, Kenneth K. C. Man, Qingpeng Zhang, Hao Luo, Carlos King Ho Wong, Celine Sze Ling Chui, Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai, Xue Li, Esther W. Chan, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Eric Yuk Fai Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueQJM · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHealth and Medical Research FundUniversity Grants CommitteeInnovation and Technology CommissionHealth Bureau
KeywordsRisk assessmentPredictive modellingAsset (computer security)Risk managementRisk factorResource allocationDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The existing risk prediction models for COVID-19 associated mortality have not considered the differences in risk factors across different age groups of patients. AIM: To develop age-specific prediction models to forecast the risk of all-cause mortality in patients recovering from COVID-19 infection. DESIGN: Population-based, retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 between 1 April 2020 and 31 July 2022 survived beyond the acute phase of infection were stratified into separate age cohorts (<45, 45-64, ≥65) and followed-up for 1 year. Backward stepwise logistic regression and four statistical and machine learning algorithms were employed to develop age-specific models on the risk of post-acute mortality following COVID-19 infection, based on a comprehensive set of clinical parameters including demographics, COVID-19 vaccination status, pre-existing comorbidities and laboratory-test findings. RESULTS: Of the 891 246 patients with COVID-19 identified, 13 578 (1.05%) died within 1 year of the index date. Age, COVID-19 vaccination status and history of acute respiratory syndrome prior infection were identified as predictors in the models for separate age groups. The model for patients aged ≥65 exhibited excellent prediction performance with an AUROC of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.88), followed by the model for patients aged 45-64 [AUROC = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.85)] and those aged <45 [AUROC = 0.79 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.86)]. CONCLUSION: The age-specific models accurately predicted the risk of post-acute mortality in their corresponding age groups of patients, providing valuable asset in optimizing clinical strategies and resource allocation in the management of the global burden of Long COVID.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQJMSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207