Background COVID-19 mortality disproportionately affects the Black population in the United States (US). To explore this association a cohort study was undertaken. Methods We assembled a cohort of 505,992 patients receiving ambulatory care at Bronx Montefiore Health System (BMHS) between 1/1/18 and 1/1/20 to evaluate the relative risk of hospitalization and death in two time-periods, the pre-COVID time-period (1/1/20–2/15/20) and COVID time-period (3/1/20–4/15/20). COVID testing, hospitalization and mortality were determined with the Black and Hispanic patient population compared separately to the White population using logistic modeling. Evaluation of the interaction of pre-COVID and COVID time periods and race, with respect to mortality was completed. Findings A total of 9,286/505,992 (1.8%) patients were hospitalized during either or both pre-COVID or COVID periods. Compared to Whites the relative risk of hospitalization of Black patients did not increase in the COVID period (p for interaction=0.12). In the pre- COVID period, compared to Whites, the odds of death for Blacks and Hispanics adjusted for comorbidity was statistically equivalent. In the COVID period compared to Whites the adjusted odds of death for Blacks was 1.6 (95% CI 1.2–2.0, p = 0.001). There was a significant increase in Black mortality risk from pre-COVID to COVID periods (p for interaction=0.02). Adjustment for relevant clinical and social indices attenuated but did not fully explain the observed difference in Black mortality. Interpretation The BMHS COVID experience demonstrates that Blacks do have a higher mortality with COVID incompletely explained by age, multiple reported comorbidities and available metrics of sociodemographic disparity. Funding N/A
Background and Purpose This study evaluated the use of an artificial intelligence (AI) platform on mobile devices in measuring and increasing medication adherence in stroke patients on anticoagulation therapy. The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), while reducing the need for monitoring, have also placed pressure on patients to self-manage. Suboptimal adherence goes undetected as routine laboratory tests are not reliable indicators of adherence, placing patients at increased risk of stroke and bleeding. Methods A randomized, parallel-group, 12-week study was conducted in adults (n = 28) with recently diagnosed ischemic stroke receiving any anticoagulation. Patients were randomized to daily monitoring by the AI Platform (intervention) or to no daily monitoring (control). The AI application visually identified the patient, the medication and confirmed ingestion. Adherence was measured by pill counts and plasma sampling in both groups. Results For all patients (n = 28), mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 57 (13.2) years and 53.6% were female. Mean (SD) cumulative adherence based on the AI Platform was 90.5% (7.5%). Plasma drug concentration levels indicated that adherence was 100% (15 of 15) and 50% (6 of 12) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Conclusions Patients, some with little experience using a smartphone, successfully used the technology and demonstrated a 50% improvement in adherence based on plasma drug concentration levels. For patients receiving DOACs, absolute improvement increased to 67%. Real-time monitoring has the potential to increase adherence and change behavior, particularly in patients on DOAC therapy. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02599259.
Convalescent plasma with severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies (CCP) may hold promise as a treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We compared the mortality and clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 who received 200 mL of CCP with a spike protein IgG titer ≥ 1:2430 (median 1:47,385) within 72 hours of admission with propensity score–matched controls cared for at a medical center in the Bronx, between April 13 and May 4, 2020. Matching criteria for controls were age, sex, body mass index, race, ethnicity, comorbidities, week of admission, oxygen requirement, D-dimer, lymphocyte counts, corticosteroid use, and anticoagulation use. There was no difference in mortality or oxygenation between CCP recipients and controls at day 28. When stratified by age, compared with matched controls, CCP recipients less than 65 years had 4-fold lower risk of mortality and 4-fold lower risk of deterioration in oxygenation or mortality at day 28. For CCP recipients, pretransfusion spike protein IgG, IgM, and IgA titers were associated with mortality at day 28 in univariate analyses. No adverse effects of CCP were observed. Our results suggest CCP may be beneficial for hospitalized patients less than 65 years, but data from controlled trials are needed to validate this finding and establish the effect of aging on CCP efficacy.
Background During a pandemic, it is important for clinicians to stratify patients and decide who receives limited medical resources. Machine learning models have been proposed to accurately predict COVID-19 disease severity. Previous studies have typically tested only one machine learning algorithm and limited performance evaluation to area under the curve analysis. To obtain the best results possible, it may be important to test different machine learning algorithms to find the best prediction model. Objective In this study, we aimed to use automated machine learning (autoML) to train various machine learning algorithms. We selected the model that best predicted patients’ chances of surviving a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, we identified which variables (ie, vital signs, biomarkers, comorbidities, etc) were the most influential in generating an accurate model. Methods Data were retrospectively collected from all patients who tested positive for COVID-19 at our institution between March 1 and July 3, 2020. We collected 48 variables from each patient within 36 hours before or after the index time (ie, real-time polymerase chain reaction positivity). Patients were followed for 30 days or until death. Patients’ data were used to build 20 machine learning models with various algorithms via autoML. The performance of machine learning models was measured by analyzing the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPCR). Subsequently, we established model interpretability via Shapley additive explanation and partial dependence plots to identify and rank variables that drove model predictions. Afterward, we conducted dimensionality reduction to extract the 10 most influential variables. AutoML models were retrained by only using these 10 variables, and the output models were evaluated against the model that used 48 variables. Results Data from 4313 patients were used to develop the models. The best model that was generated by using autoML and 48 variables was the stacked ensemble model (AUPRC=0.807). The two best independent models were the gradient boost machine and extreme gradient boost models, which had an AUPRC of 0.803 and 0.793, respectively. The deep learning model (AUPRC=0.73) was substantially inferior to the other models. The 10 most influential variables for generating high-performing models were systolic and diastolic blood pressure, age, pulse oximetry level, blood urea nitrogen level, lactate dehydrogenase level, D-dimer level, troponin level, respiratory rate, and Charlson comorbidity score. After the autoML models were retrained with these 10 variables, the stacked ensemble model still had the best performance (AUPRC=0.791). Conclusions We used autoML to develop high-performing models that predicted the survival of patients with COVID-19. In addition, we identified important variables that correlated with mortality. This is proof of concept that autoML is an efficient, effective, and informative method for generating machine learning–based clinical decision support tools.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.