Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36991342›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical research methodology2023

Modeling COVID-19 disease processes by remote elicitation of causal Bayesian networks from medical experts.

Steven Mascaro, Yue Wu, Owen Woodberry, Erik P Nyberg, Ross Pearson, Jessica A Ramsay, Ariel O Mace, David A Foley, Thomas L Snelling, Ann E Nicholson and 1 more

Full text readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors.

Steven MascaroFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Yue WuSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia.
Owen WoodberryFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Erik P NybergFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Ross PearsonFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Jessica A RamsayWesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia.
Ariel O MaceWesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia.
David A FoleyWesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia.
Thomas L SnellingSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia.
Ann E NicholsonFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia. ann.nicholson@monash.edu.
COVID BN Advisory Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 is a new multi-organ disease causing considerable worldwide morbidity and mortality. While many recognized pathophysiological mechanisms are involved, their exact causal relationships remain opaque. Better understanding is needed for predicting their progression, targeting therapeutic approaches, and improving patient outcomes. While many mathematical causal models describe COVID-19 epidemiology, none have described its pathophysiology.

methodsIn early 2020, we began developing such causal models. The SARS-CoV-2 virus's rapid and extensive spread made this particularly difficult: no large patient datasets were publicly available; the medical literature was flooded with sometimes conflicting pre-review reports; and clinicians in many countries had little time for academic consultations. We used Bayesian network (BN) models, which provide powerful calculation tools and directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) as comprehensible causal maps. Hence, they can incorporate both expert opinion and numerical data, and produce explainable, updatable results. To obtain the DAGs, we used extensive expert elicitation (exploiting Australia's exceptionally low COVID-19 burden) in structured online sessions. Groups of clinical and other specialists were enlisted to filter, interpret and discuss the literature and develop a current consensus. We encouraged inclusion of theoretically salient latent (unobservable) variables, likely mechanisms by extrapolation from other diseases, and documented supporting literature while noting controversies. Our method was iterative and incremental: systematically refining and validating the group output using one-on-one follow-up meetings with original and new experts. 35 experts contributed 126 hours face-to-face, and could review our products.

resultsWe present two key models, for the initial infection of the respiratory tract and the possible progression to complications, as causal DAGs and BNs with corresponding verbal descriptions, dictionaries and sources. These are the first published causal models of COVID-19 pathophysiology.

conclusionsOur method demonstrates an improved procedure for developing BNs via expert elicitation, which other teams can implement to model emergent complex phenomena. Our results have three anticipated applications: (i) freely disseminating updatable expert knowledge; (ii) guiding design and analysis of observational and clinical studies; (iii) developing and validating automated tools for causal reasoning and decision support. We are developing such tools for the initial diagnosis, resource management, and prognosis of COVID-19, parameterized using the ISARIC and LEOSS databases.

Indexed as

COVID-19Bayes TheoremDatabases, FactualHumansModels, TheoreticalSARS-CoV-2Bayesian networkCausal modelCOVID-19DAGDBNDecision supportExperimental designExpert elicitationPathophysiology

Identifiers

PMID36991342
PMCPMC10050813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
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.