skip to main content

Title: Predictive Models of Mortality for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study
Background The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and its associated disease, COVID-19, have caused worldwide disruption, leading countries to take drastic measures to address the progression of the disease. As SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread, hospitals are struggling to allocate resources to patients who are most at risk. In this context, it has become important to develop models that can accurately predict the severity of infection of hospitalized patients to help guide triage, planning, and resource allocation. Objective The aim of this study was to develop accurate models to predict the mortality of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 using basic demographics and easily obtainable laboratory data. Methods We performed a retrospective study of 375 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. The patients were randomly split into derivation and validation cohorts. Regularized logistic regression and support vector machine classifiers were trained on the derivation cohort, and accuracy metrics (F1 scores) were computed on the validation cohort. Two types of models were developed: the first type used laboratory findings from the entire length of the patient’s hospital stay, and the second type used laboratory findings that were obtained no later than 12 hours after admission. The models were further validated on a multicenter external cohort more » of 542 patients. Results Of the 375 patients with COVID-19, 174 (46.4%) died of the infection. The study cohort was composed of 224/375 men (59.7%) and 151/375 women (40.3%), with a mean age of 58.83 years (SD 16.46). The models developed using data from throughout the patients’ length of stay demonstrated accuracies as high as 97%, whereas the models with admission laboratory variables possessed accuracies of up to 93%. The latter models predicted patient outcomes an average of 11.5 days in advance. Key variables such as lactate dehydrogenase, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and percentage of lymphocytes in the blood were indicated by the models. In line with previous studies, age was also found to be an important variable in predicting mortality. In particular, the mean age of patients who survived COVID-19 infection (50.23 years, SD 15.02) was significantly lower than the mean age of patients who died of the infection (68.75 years, SD 11.83; P<.001). Conclusions Machine learning models can be successfully employed to accurately predict outcomes of patients with COVID-19. Our models achieved high accuracies and could predict outcomes more than one week in advance; this promising result suggests that these models can be highly useful for resource allocation in hospitals. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1914792 1645681 1664644 2114393
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10220302
Journal Name:
JMIR Medical Informatics
Volume:
8
Issue:
10
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
e21788
ISSN:
2291-9694
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. The new coronavirus (now named SARS-CoV-2) causing the disease pandemic in 2019 (COVID-19), has so far infected over 35 million people worldwide and killed more than 1 million. Most people with COVID-19 have no symptoms or only mild symptoms. But some become seriously ill and need hospitalization. The sickest are admitted to an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and may need mechanical ventilation to help them breath. Being able to predict which patients with COVID-19 will become severely ill could help hospitals around the world manage the huge influx of patients caused by the pandemic and save lives. Now, Hao, Sotudian,more »Wang, Xu et al. show that computer models using artificial intelligence technology can help predict which COVID-19 patients will be hospitalized, admitted to the ICU, or need mechanical ventilation. Using data of 2,566 COVID-19 patients from five Massachusetts hospitals, Hao et al. created three separate models that can predict hospitalization, ICU admission, and the need for mechanical ventilation with more than 86% accuracy, based on patient characteristics, clinical symptoms, laboratory results and chest x-rays. Hao et al. found that the patients’ vital signs, age, obesity, difficulty breathing, and underlying diseases like diabetes, were the strongest predictors of the need for hospitalization. Being male, having diabetes, cloudy chest x-rays, and certain laboratory results were the most important risk factors for intensive care treatment and mechanical ventilation. Laboratory results suggesting tissue damage, severe inflammation or oxygen deprivation in the body's tissues were important warning signs of severe disease. The results provide a more detailed picture of the patients who are likely to suffer from severe forms of COVID-19. Using the predictive models may help physicians identify patients who appear okay but need closer monitoring and more aggressive treatment. The models may also help policy makers decide who needs workplace accommodations such as being allowed to work from home, which individuals may benefit from more frequent testing, and who should be prioritized for vaccination when a vaccine becomes available.« less
  2. Calderaro, Adriana (Ed.)
    The World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) a global pandemic on 11 March 2020. In Ecuador, the first case of COVID-19 was recorded on 29 February 2020. Despite efforts to control its spread, SARS-CoV-2 overran the Ecuadorian public health system, which became one of the most affected in Latin America on 24 April 2020. The Hospital General del Sur de Quito (HGSQ) had to transition from a general to a specific COVID-19 health center in a short period of time to fulfill the health demand from patients with respiratory afflictions. Here, we summarized the implementations applied in themore »HGSQ to become a COVID-19 exclusive hospital, including the rearrangement of hospital rooms and a triage strategy based on a severity score calculated through an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted chest computed tomography (CT). Moreover, we present clinical, epidemiological, and laboratory data from 75 laboratory tested COVID-19 patients, which represent the first outbreak of Quito city. The majority of patients were male with a median age of 50 years. We found differences in laboratory parameters between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU cases considering C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, and lymphocytes. Sensitivity and specificity of the AI-assisted chest CT were 21.4% and 66.7%, respectively, when considering a score >70%; regardless, this system became a cornerstone of hospital triage due to the lack of RT-PCR testing and timely results. If health workers act as vectors of SARS-CoV-2 at their domiciles, they can seed outbreaks that might put 1,879,047 people at risk of infection within 15 km around the hospital. Despite our limited sample size, the information presented can be used as a local example that might aid future responses in low and middle-income countries facing respiratory transmitted epidemics.« less
  3. Background There are still many unanswered questions about the novel coronavirus; however, a largely underutilized source of knowledge is the millions of people who have recovered after contracting the virus. This includes a majority of undocumented cases of COVID-19, which were classified as mild or moderate and received little to no clinical care during the course of illness. Objective This study aims to document and glean insights from the experiences of individuals with a first-hand experience in dealing with COVID-19, especially the so-called mild-to-moderate cases that self-resolved while in isolation. Methods This web-based survey study called C19 Insider Scoop recruitedmore »adult participants aged 18 years or older who reside in the United States and had tested positive for COVID-19 or antibodies. Participants were recruited through various methods, including online support groups for COVID-19 survivors, advertisement in local news outlets, as well as through professional and other networks. The main outcomes measured in this study included knowledge of contraction or transmission of the virus, symptoms, and personal experiences on the road to recovery. Results A total of 72 participants (female, n=53; male, n=19; age range: 18-73 years; mean age: 41 [SD 14] years) from 22 US states were enrolled in this study. The top known source of how people contracted SARS-CoV-2, the virus known to cause COVID-19, was through a family or household member (26/72, 35%). This was followed by essential workers contracting the virus through the workplace (13/72, 18%). Participants reported up to 27 less-documented symptoms that they experienced during their illness, such as brain or memory fog, palpitations, ear pain or discomfort, and neurological problems. In addition, 47 of 72 (65%) participants reported that their symptoms lasted longer than the commonly cited 2-week period even for mild cases of COVID-19. The mean recovery time of the study participants was 4.5 weeks, and exactly one-half of participants (50%) still experienced lingering symptoms of COVID-19 after an average of 65 days following illness onset. Additionally, 37 (51%) participants reported that they experienced stigma associated with contracting COVID-19. Conclusions This study presents preliminary findings suggesting that emphasis on family or household spread of COVID-19 may be lacking and that there is a general underestimation of the recovery time even for mild cases of illness with the virus. Although a larger study is needed to validate these results, it is important to note that as more people experience COVID-19, insights from COVID-19 survivors can enable a more informed public, pave the way for others who may be affected by the virus, and guide further research.« less
  4. Objective: To identify differences in short-term outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) according to various racial/ethnic groups.Design: Analysis of Cerner de-identified COVID-19 dataset.Setting: A total of 62 health care facilities.Participants: The cohort included 49,277 adult COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized from December 1, 2019 to November 13, 2020.Methods: We compared patients’ age, gender, individual components of Charl­son and Elixhauser comorbidities, medical complications, use of do-not-resuscitate, use of palliative care, and socioeconomic status between various racial and/or ethnic groups. We further compared the rates of in-hos­pital mortality and non-routine discharges between various racial and/or ethnic groups.Main Outcome Measures: Themore »primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortali­ty. The secondary outcome was non-routine discharge (discharge to destinations other than home, such as short-term hospitals or other facilities including intermediate care and skilled nursing homes).Results: Compared with White patients, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher among African American (OR 1.5; 95%CI:1.3-1.6, P<.001), Hispanic (OR1.4; 95%CI:1.3-1.6, P<.001), and Asian or Pacific Islander (OR 1.5; 95%CI: 1.1-1.9, P=.002) patients after adjustment for age and gender, Elixhauser comorbidities, do-not-resuscitate status, palliative care use, and socioeconomic status.Conclusions: Our study found that, among hospitalized patients with COVID-2019, African American, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander patients had increased mortality compared with White patients after adjusting for sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and do-not-resuscitate/pallia­tive care status. Our findings add additional perspective to other recent studies. Ethn Dis. 2021;31(3):389-398; doi:10.18865/ed.31.3.389« less
  5. Background Conventional diagnosis of COVID-19 with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing (hereafter, PCR) is associated with prolonged time to diagnosis and significant costs to run the test. The SARS-CoV-2 virus might lead to characteristic patterns in the results of widely available, routine blood tests that could be identified with machine learning methodologies. Machine learning modalities integrating findings from these common laboratory test results might accelerate ruling out COVID-19 in emergency department patients. Objective We sought to develop (ie, train and internally validate with cross-validation techniques) and externally validate a machine learning model to rule out COVID 19 usingmore »only routine blood tests among adults in emergency departments. Methods Using clinical data from emergency departments (EDs) from 66 US hospitals before the pandemic (before the end of December 2019) or during the pandemic (March-July 2020), we included patients aged ≥20 years in the study time frame. We excluded those with missing laboratory results. Model training used 2183 PCR-confirmed cases from 43 hospitals during the pandemic; negative controls were 10,000 prepandemic patients from the same hospitals. External validation used 23 hospitals with 1020 PCR-confirmed cases and 171,734 prepandemic negative controls. The main outcome was COVID 19 status predicted using same-day routine laboratory results. Model performance was assessed with area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve as well as sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV). Results Of 192,779 patients included in the training, external validation, and sensitivity data sets (median age decile 50 [IQR 30-60] years, 40.5% male [78,249/192,779]), AUROC for training and external validation was 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.92). Using a risk score cutoff of 1.0 (out of 100) in the external validation data set, the model achieved sensitivity of 95.9% and specificity of 41.7%; with a cutoff of 2.0, sensitivity was 92.6% and specificity was 59.9%. At the cutoff of 2.0, the NPVs at a prevalence of 1%, 10%, and 20% were 99.9%, 98.6%, and 97%, respectively. Conclusions A machine learning model developed with multicenter clinical data integrating commonly collected ED laboratory data demonstrated high rule-out accuracy for COVID-19 status, and might inform selective use of PCR-based testing.« less