ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024
Which decisions affect cohort distribution in COVID-19 data analytics?
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. 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.
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
Data analytics has emerged as a crucial tool for understanding the multifaceted impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. By collecting and analyzing extensive datasets, researchers have gained valuable insights into the virus's transmission, severity, and the effectiveness of public health measures. Yet, many contradictive and non-reproducible results have been published. The significance of cohort representativeness in this context cannot be overstated, as diverse cohorts provide a comprehensive understanding of how various demographic and clinical factors influence COVID-19 outcomes. This study investigates the impact of decision-making processes on cohort diversity, focusing on demographic categories including sex, race, and ethnicity. Results show that decisions made during data preprocessing and cohort construction increase variability in demographic distribution. Specifically, the difference in female representation varied by 0.77% to 2.68%, in Black race from 1.17% to 5.15%, and in Hispanic or Latino ethnicity from 5.84% to 8.21%. It highlights how arbitrary decisions can lead to varying data including changes to data distribution. Seemingly unrelated to demographics factors, including timing and provider selection, significantly influence patient distribution and outcomes, underscoring the necessity for informed, data-driven strategies. The findings emphasize the importance of strategic, evidence-based decision-making to enhance consistency, optimize resource utilization, and effectively serve diverse populations, ultimately contributing to more equitable health outcomes and informed public health policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41726482PMC12919597What 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.