ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2025
Personalized risk score for post-COVID-19 condition: Bayesian directed acyclic graphic approach.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Personalized risk score for post-COVID-19 condition: Bayesian directed acyclic graphic approach.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) has gained traction currently in the post-pandemic era. To address this, we utilized a Bayesian directed acyclic graphic (DAG) model to develop a personalized composite risk score (CRS) for PCC, based on the tabular data derived from a comprehensive meta-analysis. Our risk assessment model incorporates 215 combinations of risk factors, including personal demographic and health-related profiles, across 41 studies involving over 860,000 COVID-19 cases. The CRS ranges from 0 to 500, categorizing patients into risk quartiles and estimating PCC probability across SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns, including Wild/D614G/Alpha, Delta, and Omicron BA.1/BA.2. External validation demonstrated accurate predictions, though higher risk scores showed slight deviations, particularly in BA.5 Omicron subset. The risk assessment model is not only adaptable for incorporating new evidence as SARS-CoV-2 subvariants emerge but also very valuable in facilitating the optimal individualized medical care for PCC patients and prioritizing a spectrum of risk groups for early PCC diagnosis. Notably, the adaptability of Bayesian DAG model enhances PCC risk prediction, enabling data integration for evolving SARS-CoV-2 contexts and informing healthcare resource allocation for high-risk groups.
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.