Protocol for the development and evaluation of a tool for predicting risk of short-term adverse outcomes due to COVID-19 in the general UK population
Hippisley-Cox, J.; Clift, A. K.; Coupland, C. A.; Keogh, R.; Diaz-Ordaz, K.; Williamson, E.; Harrison, E.; Hayward, A.; Hemingway, H.; Horby, P.; Mehta, N.; Benger, J. K.; Khunti, K.; Spiegelhalter, D.; Sheikh, A.; Valabhji, J.; Lyons, R. A.; Robson, J.; Semple, M. G.; Kee, F.; Johnson, P.; Jebb, S.; Williams, T.; Coggon, D.
Show abstract
IntroductionNovel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has propagated a global pandemic with significant health, economic and social costs. Emerging emergence has suggested that several factors may be associated with increased risk from severe outcomes or death from COVID-19. Clinical risk prediction tools have significant potential to generate individualised assessment of risk and may be useful for population stratification and other use cases. Methods and analysisWe will use a prospective open cohort study of routinely collected data from 1205 general practices in England in the QResearch database. The primary outcome is COVID-19 mortality (in or out-of-hospital) defined as confirmed or suspected COVID-19 mentioned on the death certificate, or death occurring in a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection between 24th January and 30th April 2020. Our primary outcome in adults is COVID-19 mortality (including out of hospital and in hospital deaths). We will also examine COVID-19 hospitalisation in children. Time-to-event models will be developed in the training data to derive separate risk equations in adults (19-100 years) for males and females for evaluation of risk of each outcome within the 3-month follow-up period (24th January to 30th April 2020), accounting for competing risks. Predictors considered will include age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, smoking status, alcohol intake, body mass index, pre-existing medical co-morbidities, and concurrent medication. Measures of performance (prediction errors, calibration and discrimination) will be determined in the test data for men and women separately and by ten-year age group. For children, descriptive statistics will be undertaken if there are currently too few serious events to allow development of a risk model. The final model will be externally evaluated in (a) geographically separate practices and (b) other relevant datasets as they become available. Ethics and disseminationThe project has ethical approval and the results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Strengths and limitations of the studyO_LIThe individual-level linkage of general practice, Public Health England testing, Hospital Episode Statistics and Office of National Statistics death register datasets enable a robust and accurate ascertainment of outcomes C_LIO_LIThe models will be trained and evaluated in population-representative datasets of millions of individuals C_LIO_LIShielding for clinically extremely vulnerable was advised and in place during the study period, therefore risk predictions influenced by the presence of some shielding conditions may require careful consideration C_LI
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and validation of an algorithm to estimate the risk of severe complications of COVID-19 to prioritise vaccination 94%
- Identifying markers of health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access in UK electronic health records 94%
- The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH): Protocol for a prospective longitudinal cohort study of healthcare and ancillary workers in UK healthcare settings 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of SARS-CoV-2 testing on healthcare seeking behaviour at primary care level: implications for COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness estimates in test-negative design studies. 90%
- The health impact of long COVID during the 2021-2022 Omicron wave in Australia: a quantitative burden of disease study 90%
- Cohort profile: Virus Watch: Understanding community incidence, symptom profiles, and transmission of COVID-19 in relation to population movement and behaviour 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Patterns of rates of mortality in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 94%
- STIMULATE-ICP-CAREINEQUAL - Defining usual care and examining inequalities in Long Covid support: protocol for a mixed-methods study (part of STIMULATE-ICP: Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways) 93%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Using quantitative bias analysis to adjust for misclassification of COVID-19 outcomes: An applied example of inhaled corticosteroids and COVID-19 outcomes 92%
- The Medicines Intelligence Data Platform: A population-based data resource from New South Wales, Australia 90%
- INSIGHT: A Tool for Fit-for-Purpose Evaluation and Quality Assessment of Observational Data Sources for Real World Evidence on Medicine and Vaccine Safety 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk Of Hospitalisation With COVID-19 Among Teachers Compared To Healthcare Workers And Other Working-Age Adults. A Nationwide Case-Control Study 92%
- Features of 16,749 hospitalised UK patients with COVID-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol 91%
- Linked electronic health records for research on a nationwide cohort including over 54 million people in England 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.