Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34140592›Full record

Observational studyScientific reports2021

Multivariable mortality risk prediction using machine learning for COVID-19 patients at admission (AICOVID).

Sujoy Kar, Rajesh Chawla, Sai Praveen Haranath, Suresh Ramasubban, Nagarajan Ramakrishnan, Raju Vaishya, Anupam Sibal, Sangita Reddy

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Fast and interpretable mortality risk scores for critical care patients.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sujoy KarApollo Hospitals, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, 500033, India. drsujoy_k@apollohospitals.com.
Rajesh ChawlaIndraprastha Apollo Hospitals, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Sai Praveen HaranathApollo Hospitals, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, 500033, India.
Suresh RamasubbanApollo Multispecialty Hospitals, Kolkata, 700054, India.
Nagarajan RamakrishnanApollo Hospitals, Greams Road, Chennai, India.
Raju VaishyaIndraprastha Apollo Hospitals, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Anupam SibalIndraprastha Apollo Hospitals, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, India.
Sangita ReddyApollo Hospitals, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, 500033, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), early identification of patients with a high risk of mortality can significantly improve triage, bed allocation, timely management, and possibly, outcome. The study objective is to develop and validate individualized mortality risk scores based on the anonymized clinical and laboratory data at admission and determine the probability of Deaths at 7 and 28 days. Data of 1393 admitted patients (Expired-8.54%) was collected from six Apollo Hospital centers (from April to July 2020) using a standardized template and electronic medical records. 63 Clinical and Laboratory parameters were studied based on the patient's initial clinical state at admission and laboratory parameters within the first 24 h. The Machine Learning (ML) modelling was performed using eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) Algorithm. 'Time to event' using Cox Proportional Hazard Model was used and combined with XGB Algorithm. The prospective validation cohort was selected of 977 patients (Expired-8.3%) from six centers from July to October 2020. The Clinical API for the Algorithm is  http://20.44.39.47/covid19v2/page1.php being used prospectively. Out of the 63 clinical and laboratory parameters, Age [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.31; 95% CI 1.52-3.53], Male Gender (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.06-2.85), Respiratory Distress (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.32-2.53), Diabetes Mellitus (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.83-1.77), Chronic Kidney Disease (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.72-5.38), Coronary Artery Disease (HR 1.56, 95% CI - 0.91 to 2.69), respiratory rate > 24/min (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.03-2.3), oxygen saturation below 90% (HR 2.84, 95% CI 1.87-4.3), Lymphocyte% in DLC (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.23-2.32), INR (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.31-2.13), LDH (HR 4.02, 95% CI 2.66-6.07) and Ferritin (HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.32-4.74) were found to be significant. The performance parameters of the current model is at AUC ROC Score of 0.8685 and Accuracy Score of 96.89. The validation cohort had the AUC of 0.782 and Accuracy of 0.93. The model for Mortality Risk Prediction provides insight into the COVID Clinical and Laboratory Parameters at admission. It is one of the early studies, reflecting on 'time to event' at the admission, accurately predicting patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPatient AdmissionSARS-CoV-2AgedCOVID-19Electronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsProspective StudiesRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID34140592
PMCPMC8211710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.