Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34144711›Full record

ReviewArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2021

A systematic review of prediction models to diagnose COVID-19 in adults admitted to healthcare centers.

Médéa Locquet, Anh Nguyet Diep, Charlotte Beaudart, Nadia Dardenne, Christian Brabant, Olivier Bruyère, Anne-Françoise Donneau

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Médéa Locquet *WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health, Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Ageing, Research Unit in Public Health, Epidemiology and Health, Economics, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Anh Nguyet Diep *Biostatistics Unit, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Charlotte BeaudartWHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health, Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Ageing, Research Unit in Public Health, Epidemiology and Health, Economics, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Nadia DardenneBiostatistics Unit, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Christian BrabantWHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health, Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Ageing, Research Unit in Public Health, Epidemiology and Health, Economics, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Olivier Bruyère *WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health, Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Ageing, Research Unit in Public Health, Epidemiology and Health, Economics, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium. Olivier.Bruyere@uliege.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4269-9393
Anne-Françoise Donneau *Biostatistics Unit, University of Liège, Quartier Hôpital, Av. Hippocrate 13, CHU B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
University of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is putting significant pressure on the hospital system. To help clinicians in the rapid triage of patients at high risk of COVID-19 while waiting for RT-PCR results, different diagnostic prediction models have been developed. Our objective is to identify, compare, and evaluate performances of prediction models for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in adult patients in a health care setting.

methodsA search for relevant references has been conducted on the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. Rigorous eligibility criteria have been established (e.g., adult participants, suspicion of COVID-19, medical setting) and applied by two independent investigators to identify suitable studies at 2 different stages: (1) titles and abstracts screening and (2) full-texts screening. Risk of bias (RoB) has been assessed using the Prediction model study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Data synthesis has been presented according to a narrative report of findings.

resultsOut of the 2334 references identified by the literature search, 13 articles have been included in our systematic review. The studies, carried out all over the world, were performed in 2020. The included articles proposed a model developed using different methods, namely, logistic regression, score, machine learning, XGBoost. All the included models performed well to discriminate adults at high risks of presenting COVID-19 (all area under the ROC curve (AUROC) > 0.500). The best AUROC was observed for the model of Kurstjens et al (AUROC = 0.940 (0.910-0.960), which was also the model that achieved the highest sensitivity (98%). RoB was evaluated as low in general.

conclusionThirteen models have been developed since the start of the pandemic in order to diagnose COVID-19 in suspected patients from health care centers. All these models are effective, to varying degrees, in identifying whether patients were at high risk of having COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19HospitalisationPrediction model

Identifiers

PMID34144711
PMCPMC8211973
OpenAlexW3169476091

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.