FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

External validation of the QCovid 2 and 3 risk prediction algorithms for risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality in adults: a national cohort study in Scotland

Por: Kerr · S. · Millington · T. · Rudan · I. · McCowan · C. · Tibble · H. · Jeffrey · K. · Fagbamigbe · A. F. · Simpson · C. R. · Robertson · C. · Hippisley-Cox · J. · Sheikh · A.
Objective

The QCovid 2 and 3 algorithms are risk prediction tools developed during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic that can be used to predict the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality, taking vaccination status into account. In this study, we assess their performance in Scotland.

Methods

We used the Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 national data platform consisting of individual-level data for the population of Scotland (5.4 million residents). Primary care data were linked to reverse-transcription PCR virology testing, hospitalisation and mortality data. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the QCovid 2 and 3 algorithms in predicting COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths between 8 December 2020 and 15 June 2021.

Results

Our validation dataset comprised 465 058 individuals, aged 19–100. We found the following performance metrics (95% CIs) for QCovid 2 and 3: Harrell’s C 0.84 (0.82 to 0.86) for hospitalisation, and 0.92 (0.90 to 0.94) for death, observed-expected ratio of 0.24 for hospitalisation and 0.26 for death (ie, both the number of hospitalisations and the number of deaths were overestimated), and a Brier score of 0.0009 (0.00084 to 0.00096) for hospitalisation and 0.00036 (0.00032 to 0.0004) for death.

Conclusions

We found good discrimination of the QCovid 2 and 3 algorithms in Scotland, although performance was worse in higher age groups. Both the number of hospitalisations and the number of deaths were overestimated.

Risk of atrial fibrillation and association with other diseases: protocol of the derivation and international external validation of a prediction model using nationwide population-based electronic health records

Por: Nadarajah · R. · Wu · J. · Arbel · R. · Haim · M. · Zahger · D. · Benita · T. R. · Rokach · L. · Cowan · J. C. · Gale · C. P.
Introduction

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major public health issue and there is rationale for the early diagnosis of AF before the first complication occurs. Previous AF screening research is limited by low yields of new cases and strokes prevented in the screened populations. For AF screening to be clinically and cost-effective, the efficiency of identification of newly diagnosed AF needs to be improved and the intervention offered may have to extend beyond oral anticoagulation for stroke prophylaxis. Previous prediction models for incident AF have been limited by their data sources and methodologies.

Methods and analysis

We will investigate the application of random forest and multivariable logistic regression to predict incident AF within a 6-month prediction horizon, that is, a time-window consistent with conducting investigation for AF. The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)-GOLD dataset will be used for derivation, and the Clalit Health Services (CHS) dataset will be used for international external geographical validation. Analyses will include metrics of prediction performance and clinical utility. We will create Kaplan-Meier plots for individuals identified as higher and lower predicted risk of AF and derive the cumulative incidence rate for non-AF cardio-renal-metabolic diseases and death over the longer term to establish how predicted AF risk is associated with a range of new non-AF disease states.

Ethics and dissemination

Permission for CPRD-GOLD was obtained from CPRD (ref no: 19_076). The CPRD ethical approval committee approved the study. CHS Helsinki committee approval 21-0169 and data usage committee approval 901. The results will be submitted as a research paper for publication to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at peer-reviewed conferences.

Trial registration number

A systematic review to guide the overall project was registered on PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021245093). The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05837364).

❌