Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34782484›Full record

ArticleThorax2022

External validation of the QCovid risk prediction algorithm for risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality in adults: national validation cohort study in Scotland.

Colin R Simpson, Chris Robertson, Steven Kerr, Ting Shi, Eleftheria Vasileiou, Emily Moore, Colin McCowan, Utkarsh Agrawal, Annemarie Docherty, Rachel Mulholland and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Colin R SimpsonSchool of Health, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand colin.simpson@vuw.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0002-5194-8083
Chris RobertsonDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Steven KerrUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3643-7859
Ting ShiUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4101-4535
Eleftheria VasileiouUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Emily MooreInformation Services Division, Public Health Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Colin McCowanSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Utkarsh AgrawalSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Annemarie DochertyUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Rachel MulhollandUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Josie MurrayHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Lewis Duthie RitchieAcademic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Jim McMenaminHealth Protection Scotland, Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Julia Hippisley-CoxPrimary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Aziz SheikhUsher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
University of Edinburgh · GBHealth Protection Scotland · GBUniversity of St Andrews · GBPublic Health Scotland · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GBVictoria University of Wellington · NZ

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_19075Medical Research Council MR/R008345/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe QCovid algorithm is a risk prediction tool that can be used to stratify individuals by risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality. Version 1 of the algorithm was trained using data covering 10.5 million patients in England in the period 24 January 2020 to 30 April 2020. We carried out an external validation of version 1 of the QCovid algorithm in Scotland.

methodsWe established a national COVID-19 data platform using individual level data for the population of Scotland (5.4 million residents). Primary care data were linked to reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) virology testing, hospitalisation and mortality data. We assessed the performance of the QCovid algorithm in predicting COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths in our dataset for two time periods matching the original study: 1 March 2020 to 30 April 2020, and 1 May 2020 to 30 June 2020.

resultsOur dataset comprised 5 384 819 individuals, representing 99% of the estimated population (5 463 300) resident in Scotland in 2020. The algorithm showed good calibration in the first period, but systematic overestimation of risk in the second period, prior to temporal recalibration. Harrell's C for deaths in females and males in the first period was 0.95 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.95) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.93), respectively. Harrell's C for hospitalisations in females and males in the first period was 0.81 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.82) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.82), respectively.

conclusionsVersion 1 of the QCovid algorithm showed high levels of discrimination in predicting the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths in adults resident in Scotland for the original two time periods studied, but is likely to need ongoing recalibration prospectively.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAlgorithmsCalibrationCohort StudiesFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleScotlandclinical epidemiologyCOVID-19

Identifiers

PMID34782484
PMCPMC8595052
OpenAlexW3213055150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.