Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36343205›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Assessing Associations Between COVID-19 Symptomology and Adverse Outcomes After Piloting Crowdsourced Data Collection: Cross-sectional Survey Study.

Natalie Flaks-Manov, Jiawei Bai, Cindy Zhang, Anand Malpani, Stuart C Ray, Casey Overby Taylor

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 84% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Natalie Flaks-ManovJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9163-6295
Jiawei BaiJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4021-0101
Cindy ZhangJohns Hopkins Whiting School of Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0942-7321
Anand MalpaniJohns Hopkins Whiting School of Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9477-9403
Stuart C RayJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1051-7260
Casey Overby TaylorJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9302-5968
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCrowdsourcing is a useful way to rapidly collect information on COVID-19 symptoms. However, there are potential biases and data quality issues given the population that chooses to participate in crowdsourcing activities and the common strategies used to screen participants based on their previous experience.

objectiveThe study aimed to (1) build a pipeline to enable data quality and population representation checks in a pilot setting prior to deploying a final survey to a crowdsourcing platform, (2) assess COVID-19 symptomology among survey respondents who report a previous positive COVID-19 result, and (3) assess associations of symptomology groups and underlying chronic conditions with adverse outcomes due to COVID-19.

methodsWe developed a web-based survey and hosted it on the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) crowdsourcing platform. We conducted a pilot study from August 5, 2020, to August 14, 2020, to refine the filtering criteria according to our needs before finalizing the pipeline. The final survey was posted from late August to December 31, 2020. Hierarchical cluster analyses were performed to identify COVID-19 symptomology groups, and logistic regression analyses were performed for hospitalization and mechanical ventilation outcomes. Finally, we performed a validation of study outcomes by comparing our findings to those reported in previous systematic reviews.

resultsThe crowdsourcing pipeline facilitated piloting our survey study and revising the filtering criteria to target specific MTurk experience levels and to include a second attention check. We collected data from 1254 COVID-19-positive survey participants and identified the following 6 symptomology groups: abdominal and bladder pain (Group 1); flu-like symptoms (loss of smell/taste/appetite; Group 2); hoarseness and sputum production (Group 3); joint aches and stomach cramps (Group 4); eye or skin dryness and vomiting (Group 5); and no symptoms (Group 6). The risk factors for adverse COVID-19 outcomes differed for different symptomology groups. The only risk factor that remained significant across 4 symptomology groups was influenza vaccine in the previous year (Group 1: odds ratio [OR] 6.22, 95% CI 2.32-17.92; Group 2: OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.74-3.18; Group 3: OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.32-10.98; Group 4: OR 4.44, 95% CI 1.53-14.49). Our findings regarding the symptoms of abdominal pain, cough, fever, fatigue, shortness of breath, and vomiting as risk factors for COVID-19 adverse outcomes were concordant with the findings of other researchers. Some high-risk symptoms found in our study, including bladder pain, dry eyes or skin, and loss of appetite, were reported less frequently by other researchers and were not considered previously in relation to COVID-19 adverse outcomes.

conclusionsWe demonstrated that a crowdsourced approach was effective for collecting data to assess symptomology associated with COVID-19. Such a strategy may facilitate efficient assessments in a dynamic intersection between emerging infectious diseases, and societal and environmental changes.

Indexed as

adverse outcomescoronavirusCOVID-19crowdsourcingdata qualitysymptomologysymptoms

Identifiers

PMID36343205
PMCPMC9746676
OpenAlexW4308550860

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.