ArticleInfectious disease reports2022
Risk Stratification of COVID-19 Using Routine Laboratory Tests: A Machine Learning Approach.
Article in Infectious disease reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative machine learning approach for liver fibrosis and disease severity evaluation in MAFLD patients using MRI fat content analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Application of BukaGini algorithm for enhanced feature interaction analysis in intrusion detection systems.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant stress on an already overburdened health system. The diagnosis was based on detection of a positive RT-PCR test, which may be delayed when there is peak demand for testing. Rapid risk stratification of high-risk patients allows for the prioritization of resources for patient care. The study aims were to classify patients as severe or not severe based on outcomes using machine learning on routine laboratory tests. Data were extracted for all individuals who had at least one SARS-CoV-2 PCR test conducted via the NHLS between the periods of 1 March 2020 to 7 July 2020. Exclusion criteria: those 18 years, and those with indeterminate PCR tests. Results for 15437 patients (3301 positive and 12,136 negative) were used to fit six machine learning models, namely the logistic regression (LR) (the base model), decision trees (DT), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), convolutional neural network (CNN) and self-normalising neural network (SNN). Model development was carried out by splitting the data into training and testing set of a ratio 70:30, together with a 10-fold cross-validation re-sampling technique. For risk stratification, admission to high care or ICU was the outcome for severe disease. Performance of the models varied: sensitivity was best for RF at 75% and accuracy of 75% for CNN. The area under the curve ranged from 57% for CNN to 75% for RF. RF and SNN were the best-performing models. Machine Learning (ML) can be incorporated into the laboratory information system and offers promise for early identification and risk stratification of COVID-19 patients, particularly in areas of resource-poor settings.
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.