ArticleMicrobial pathogenesis2022
Evaluating the ability of the NLHA2 and artificial neural network models to predict COVID-19 severity, and comparing them with the four existing scoring systems.
Article in Microbial pathogenesis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Controlling nosocomial transmission of respiratory infections in neurological wards: insights from COVID-19 pandemic data.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025Article
- Predicting outcomes using neural networks in the intensive care unit.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- An innovative ensemble model based on deep learning for predicting COVID-19 infection.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To improve the identification and subsequent intervention of COVID-19 patients at risk for ICU admission, we constructed COVID-19 severity prediction models using logistic regression and artificial neural network (ANN) analysis and compared them with the four existing scoring systems (PSI, CURB-65, SMARTCOP, and MuLBSTA). In this prospective multi-center study, 296 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were enrolled and split into the General-Ward-Care group (N = 238) and the ICU-Admission group (N = 58). The PSI model (AUC = 0.861) had the best results among the existing four scoring systems, followed by SMARTCOP (AUC = 0.770), motified-MuLBSTA (AUC = 0.761), and CURB-65 (AUC = 0.712). Data from 197 patients (training set) were analyzed for modeling. The beta coefficients from logistic regression were used to develop a severity prediction model and risk score calculator. The final model (NLHA2) included five covariates (consumes alcohol, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, hemoglobin, and AKP). The NLHA2 model (training: AUC = 0.959; testing: AUC = 0.857) had similar results to the PSI model, but with fewer variable items. ANN analysis was used to build another complex model, which had higher accuracy (training: AUC = 1.000; testing: AUC = 0.907). Discrimination and calibration were further verified through bootstrapping (2000 replicates), Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit testing, and Brier score calculation. In conclusion, the PSI model is the best existing system for predicting ICU admission among COVID-19 patients, while two newly-designed models (NLHA2 and ANN) performed better than PSI, and will provide a new approach for the development of prognostic evaluation system in a novel respiratory viral epidemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.