Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34707184›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A machine-learning parsimonious multivariable predictive model of mortality risk in patients with Covid-19.

Rita Murri, Jacopo Lenkowicz, Carlotta Masciocchi, Chiara Iacomini, Massimo Fantoni, Andrea Damiani, Antonio Marchetti, Paolo Domenico Angelo Sergi, Giovanni Arcuri, Alfredo Cesario and 22 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

32 authors.

Rita MurriSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy. rita.murri@policlinicogemelli.it.
Jacopo LenkowiczFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Carlotta MasciocchiFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Chiara IacominiFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Massimo FantoniSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Andrea DamianiUniversità Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Antonio MarchettiFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Paolo Domenico Angelo SergiFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ArcuriFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Alfredo CesarioFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Stefano PatarnelloFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Massimo AntonelliSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Rocco BellantoneSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Roberto BernabeiSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Stefania BocciaSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Paolo CalabresiSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Andrea CambieriFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Roberto CaudaSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Cesare ColosimoSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Filippo CreaSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Ruggero De MariaUniversità Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Valerio De StefanoSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Francesco FranceschiSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Antonio GasbarriniSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Ornella ParoliniUniversità Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Luca RicheldiSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Maurizio SanguinettiSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Andrea UrbaniSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Maurizio ZegaFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ScambiaSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo ValentiniSezione di Malattie Infettive, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Gemelli against Covid Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is impressively challenging the healthcare system. Several prognostic models have been validated but few of them are implemented in daily practice. The objective of the study was to validate a machine-learning risk prediction model using easy-to-obtain parameters to help to identify patients with COVID-19 who are at higher risk of death. The training cohort included all patients admitted to Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli with COVID-19 from March 5, 2020, to November 5, 2020. Afterward, the model was tested on all patients admitted to the same hospital with COVID-19 from November 6, 2020, to February 5, 2021. The primary outcome was in-hospital case-fatality risk. The out-of-sample performance of the model was estimated from the training set in terms of Area under the Receiving Operator Curve (AUROC) and classification matrix statistics by averaging the results of fivefold cross validation repeated 3-times and comparing the results with those obtained on the test set. An explanation analysis of the model, based on the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), is also presented. To assess the subsequent time evolution, the change in paO2/FiO2 (P/F) at 48 h after the baseline measurement was plotted against its baseline value. Among the 921 patients included in the training cohort, 120 died (13%). Variables selected for the model were age, platelet count, SpO2, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), hemoglobin, C-reactive protein, neutrophil count, and sodium. The results of the fivefold cross-validation repeated 3-times gave AUROC of 0.87, and statistics of the classification matrix to the Youden index as follows: sensitivity 0.840, specificity 0.774, negative predictive value 0.971. Then, the model was tested on a new population (n = 1463) in which the case-fatality rate was 22.6%. The test model showed AUROC 0.818, sensitivity 0.813, specificity 0.650, negative predictive value 0.922. Considering the first quartile of the predicted risk score (low-risk score group), the case-fatality rate was 1.6%, 17.8% in the second and third quartile (high-risk score group) and 53.5% in the fourth quartile (very high-risk score group). The three risk score groups showed good discrimination for the P/F value at admission, and a positive correlation was found for the low-risk class to P/F at 48 h after admission (adjusted R-squared = 0.48). We developed a predictive model of death for people with SARS-CoV-2 infection by including only easy-to-obtain variables (abnormal blood count, BUN, C-reactive protein, sodium and lower SpO2). It demonstrated good accuracy and high power of discrimination. The simplicity of the model makes the risk prediction applicable for patients in the Emergency Department, or during hospitalization. Although it is reasonable to assume that the model is also applicable in not-hospitalized persons, only appropriate studies can assess the accuracy of the model also for persons at home.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPandemicsSARS-CoV-2AgedAged, 80 and overBlood Cell CountBlood Chemical AnalysisCohort StudiesCOVID-19FemaleHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalMultivariate AnalysisOxygen

Identifiers

PMID34707184
PMCPMC8551240

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.