Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40065374›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Comparing conventional and Bayesian workflows for clinical outcome prediction modelling with an exemplar cohort study of severe COVID-19 infection incorporating clinical biomarker test results.

Brian Sullivan, Edward Barker, Louis MacGregor, Leo Gorman, Philip Williams, Ranjeet Bhamber, Matt Thomas, Stefan Gurney, Catherine Hyams, Alastair Whiteway and 5 more

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors.

Brian SullivanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. brian.sullivan@bristol.ac.uk.
Edward BarkerDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Louis MacGregorDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Leo GormanJean Golding Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Philip WilliamsDepartment of Microbiology, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Ranjeet BhamberDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Matt ThomasIntensive Care Unit, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
Stefan GurneyIntensive Care Unit, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Catherine HyamsDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Alastair WhitewayDepartment of Clinical Heamatology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
Jennifer A CooperDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Chris McWilliamsDepartment of Engineering Mathematics, Faculty of Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Katy TurnerDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Andrew W Dowsey *Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Mahableshwar Albur *Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. mahableshwar.albur@nbt.nhs.uk.

Funding

Elizabeth Blackwell Institute for Health Research, University of Bristol and the Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund 204813/Z/16/ZHealth Data Research UK HDR CF0129Medical Research Council Research MR/T005408/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund 204813/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAssessing risk factors and creating prediction models from real-world medical data is challenging, requiring numerous modelling decisions with clinical guidance. Logistic regression is a common model for such studies, for which we advocate the use of Bayesian methods that can jointly deliver probabilistic risk factor inference and prediction. As an exemplar, we compare Bayesian logistic regression with horseshoe priors and Projective Prediction variable selection with the established frequentist LASSO approach, to predict severe COVID-19 outcomes (death or ICU admittance) from demographic and laboratory biomarker data. Our study serves as guidance on data curation, variable selection, and performance assessment with cross-validation.

methodsOur source data is based on a retrospective observational cohort design with records from three National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in southwest England, UK. Models were fit to predict severe outcomes within 28 days after admission to hospital (or a positive PCR result if already admitted) using demographic data and the first result from 30 biomarker tests collected within 3 days after admission (or testing positive if already admitted).

resultsPatients included hospitalized adults positive for COVID-19 from March to October 2020, 756 total patients: Mean age 71, 45% female, 31% (n=234) had a severe outcome, of whom 88% (n=206) died. Patients were split into training (n=534) and external validation groups (n=222). Using our Bayesian pipeline, we show a reduced variable model using Age, Urea, Prothrombin time (PT) C-reactive protein (CRP), and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has better predictive performance (median external AUC: 0.71, 95% Quantile [0.7, 0.72]) relative to a GLM using all variables (external AUC: 0.67 [0.63, 0.71]).

conclusionUrea, PT, CRP, and NLR have been highlighted by other studies, and respectively suggest that hypovolemia, derangement of circulation via clotting, and inflammation are strong predictive risk factors of severity. This study provides guidance on conventional and Bayesian regression and prediction modelling with complex clinical data.

Indexed as

COVID-19AgedAged, 80 and overBayes TheoremBiomarkersEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2BiomarkersBayesianCOVID-19Logistic regressionProjective predictionRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID40065374
PMCPMC11892292

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.