The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 472 of the 472 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review and critical appraisal of prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 infection
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1136/bmj.m1328 · Paper page
Abstract
Objective: To review and critically appraise published and preprint reports of models that aim to predict either (i) presence of existing COVID-19 infection, (ii) future complications in individuals already diagnosed with COVID-19, or (iii) models to identify individuals at high risk for COVID-19 in the general population. Design: Rapid systematic review and critical appraisal of prediction models for diagnosis or prognosis of COVID-19 infection. Data sources: PubMed, EMBASE via Ovid, Arxiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv until 24 th March 2020. Study selection: Studies that developed or validated a multivariable COVID-19 related prediction model. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full text. Data extraction: Data from included studies were extracted independently by at least two authors based on the CHARMS checklist, and risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. Data were extracted on various domains including the participants, predictors, outcomes, data analysis, and prediction model performance. Results: 2696 titles were screened. Of these, 27 studies describing 31 prediction models were included for data extraction and critical appraisal. We identified three models to predict hospital admission from pneumonia and other events (as a proxy for covid-19 pneumonia) in the general population; 18 diagnostic models to detect COVID-19 infection in symptomatic individuals (13 of which were machine learning utilising computed tomography (CT) results); and ten prognostic models for predicting mortality risk, progression to a severe state, or length of hospital stay. Only one of these studies used data on COVID-19 cases outside of China. Most reported predictors of presence of COVID-19 in suspected patients included age, body temperature, and signs and symptoms. Most reported predictors of severe prognosis in infected patients included age, sex, features derived from CT, C-reactive protein, lactic dehydrogenase, and lymphocyte count. Estimated C-index estimates for the prediction models ranged from 0.73 to 0.81 in those for the general population (reported for all 3 general population models), from 0.81 to > 0.99 in those for diagnosis (reported for 13 of the 18 diagnostic models), and from 0.85 to 0.98 in those for prognosis (reported for 6 of the 10 prognostic models). All studies were rated at high risk of bias, mostly because of non-representative selection of control patients, exclusion of patients who had not experienced the event of interest by the end of the study, and poor statistical analysis, including high risk of model overfitting. Reporting quality varied substantially between studies. A description of the study population and intended use of the models was absent in almost all reports, and calibration of predictions was rarely assessed. Conclusion: COVID-19 related prediction models are quickly entering the academic literature, to support medical decision making at a time where this is urgently needed. Our review indicates proposed models are poorly reported and at high risk of bias. Thus, their reported performance is likely optimistic and using them to support medical decision making is not advised. We call for immediate sharing of the individual participant data from COVID-19 studies to support collaborative efforts in building more rigorously developed prediction models and validating (evaluating) existing models. The aforementioned predictors identified in multiple included studies could be considered as candidate predictors for new models. We also stress the need to follow methodological guidance when developing and validating prediction models, as unreliable predictions may cause more harm than benefit when used to guide clinical decisions. Finally, studies should adhere to the TRIPOD statement to facilitate validating, appraising, advocating and clinically using the reported models. Systematic review registration protocol: osf.io/ehc47/ , registration: osf.io/wy245 Summary boxes: What is already known on this topic: - The sharp recent increase in COVID-19 infections has put a strain on healthcare systems worldwide, necessitating efficient early detection, diagnosis of patients suspected of the infection and prognostication of COVID-19 confirmed cases. - Viral nucleic acid testing and chest CT are standard methods for diagnosing COVID-19, but are time-consuming. - Earlier reports suggest that the elderly, patients with comorbidity (COPD, cardiovascular disease, hypertension), and patients presenting with dyspnoea are vulnerable to more severe morbidity and mortality after COVID-19 infection. What this study adds: - We identified three models to predict hospital admission from pneumonia and other events (as a proxy for COVID-19 pneumonia) in the general population. - We identified 18 diagnostic models for COVID-19 detection in symptomatic patients. - 13 of these were machine learning models based on CT images. - We identified ten prognostic models for COVID-19 infected patients, of which six aimed to predict mortality risk in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients, two aimed to predict progression to a severe or critical state, and two aimed to predict a hospital stay of more than 10 days from admission. - Included studies were poorly reported compromising their subsequent appraisal, and recommendation for use in daily practice. All studies were appraised at high risk of bias, raising concern that the models may be flawed and perform poorly when applied in practice, such that their predictions may be unreliable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Medical guidelines rely on comprehensive systematic reviews, but the medical literature is growing at breakneck pace and the quality of the research is not universally adequate for summarization into policy 38 .”
From An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Medical guidelines rely on comprehensive systematic reviews, but the medical literature is growing at breakneck pace and the quality of the research is not universally adequate for summarization into policy 38 .”
From An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“within the first 15 months of the covid-19 pandemic, 381 prognostic prediction models for the disease were published.”
From PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods (2025) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Medical guidelines rely on comprehensive systematic reviews, but the medical literature is growing at breakneck pace and the quality of the research is not universally adequate for summarization into policy 38 .”
From An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“At least 731 diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies on covid-19 were published during the first 12 months of the pandemic.9”
From TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods (2024) · cites this paper as [9]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the citing paper
“Inadequate efforts were made to prioritise the health and safety of these workers, first in requiring precautions in their workplaces, and later in reducing structural barriers to accessing vaccines when they became available.”
From The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [262]
In the citing paper
“Other groups that have been disproportionately affected include people with comorbid medical conditions, particularly those with immunocompromised status; people living with physical disabilities or mental disorders; residents of congregant settings; and essential workers.”
From The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [262]
In the citing paper
“The inputs to the CDS model were Chest X-Ray (CXR) images, vital signs, demographic data, and lab values that were shown in previous publications to be predictive of COVID-19 patient outcomes18–21.”
From Federated learning for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 (2021) · cites this paper as [19]
In the citing paper
“older adults are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 infection (4), especially if they are affected by comorbidities such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) (5).”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Items 401–472 of 472
Hectors, S. J. C. G., Riyahi, S., Dev, H., Krishnan, K. R., Margolis, D., & Prince, M. R. (2020) · Abdominal Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00261-020-02823-w · Cited by 21
Chen, H., Zeng, M., Wang, X., Su, L., Xia, Y., Yang, Q., & Liu, D. (2020) · British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr.20200634 · Cited by 21
3044 Cases reveal important prognosis signatures of COVID-19 patients
Qin, S., Li, W., Shi, X., Wu, Y., Wang, C., Shen, J., Pang, R., He, B., Zhao, J. F., Qiao, Q., et al. (2021) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.01.042 · Cited by 21
Sharp, A. L., Huang, B. Z., Broder, B. I., Smith, M., Yuen, G., Subject, C. C., Nau, C., Creekmur, B., Tartof, S. Y., & Gould, M. K. (2020) · The American Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2020.10.068 · Cited by 20
Lasbleiz, A., Cariou, B., Darmon, P., Soghomonian, A., Ancel, P., Boullu, S., Houssays, M., Romain, F., Lagier, J., Boucékine, M., et al. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm9113726 · Cited by 20
Chen, H., Chen, R., Yang, H., Wang, J., Hou, Y., Hu, W., Yu, J., & Li, H. (2020) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.26713 · Cited by 20
Prediction of thromboembolic events and mortality by the CHADS2 and the CHA2DS2-VASc in COVID-19
Caro‐Codón, J., Lip, G. Y. H., Rey, J. R., Iniesta, Á. M., Rosillo, S. O., Castrejón‐Castrejón, S., Rodríguez‐Sotelo, L., García‐Veas, J. M., Clement, I. M., Martinez, L. A., et al. (2021) · EP Europace · doi:10.1093/europace/euab015 · Cited by 20
Li, Z., Zheng, Z., Li, Y., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.17.20070219 · Cited by 19
Simpson, C. R., Robertson, C., Kerr, S., Shi, T., Vasileiou, E., Moore, E., McCowan, C., Agrawal, U., Stagg, H., Mulholland, R., et al. (2021) · Thorax · doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2021-217580 · Cited by 19
Identification of risk factors for mortality associated with COVID-19
Yu, Y., Zhu, C., Yang, L., Dong, H., Wang, R., Ni, H., Chen, E., & Zhang, Z. (2020) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.9885 · Cited by 18
Heo, J., Park, J. A., Han, D., Kim, H., Ahn, D., Ha, B., Seog, W., & Park, Y. R. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/22131 · Cited by 18
Kimura, Y., Arévalo-Molina, M. E., Cristancho-Rojas, C., Kimura-Sandoval, Y., Rebollo-Hurtado, V., Licano-Zubiate, M., Chapa-Ibargüengoitia, M., & Muñoz-López, G. (2020) · Revista de investigaci�n Cl�nica · doi:10.24875/ric.20000451 · Cited by 18
Saberian, P., Tavakoli, N., Hasani-Sharamin, P., Modaber, M., Jamshididana, M., & Baratloo, A. (2020) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · doi:10.22088/cjim.11.0.536 · Cited by 18
Prognosis Score System to Predict Survival for COVID-19 Cases: a Korean Nationwide Cohort Study
Cho, S., Park, S., Song, M., Bae, Y. Y., Lee, D., & Kim, D. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26257 · Cited by 18
Li, Z., Zeng, B., Lei, P., Liu, J., Fan, B., Shen, Q., Pang, P., & Xu, R. (2020) · Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology · doi:10.3233/xst-200689 · Cited by 17
Berzuini, C., Hannan, C. J., King, A. T., Vail, A., O’Leary, C., Brough, D., Galea, J. P., Ogungbenro, K., Wright, M. K., Pathmanaban, O. N., et al. (2020) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041983 · Cited by 17
Predictive Models of Mortality for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study
Wang, T., Paschalidis, A., Liu, Q., Liu, Y., Yuan, Y., & Paschalidis, I. C. (2020) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/21788 · Cited by 17
Toh, C., & Brody, J. P. (2020) · Human Genomics · doi:10.1186/s40246-020-00288-y · Cited by 17
Ma, B., Gong, J., Yang, Y. P., Yao, X., Deng, X., & Chen, X. (2020) · Microbial Pathogenesis · doi:10.1016/j.micpath.2020.104706 · Cited by 17
Lyons, J., Nafilyan, V., Akbari, A., Davies, G. I., Griffiths, R., Harrison, E. M., Hippisley‐Cox, J., Hollinghurst, J., Khunti, K. K., North, L., et al. (2022) · International Journal for Population Data Science · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v5i4.1697 · Cited by 17
Barda, N., Riesel, D., Akriv, A., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.23.20076976 · Cited by 16
Kurstjens, S., van der Horst, A., Herpers, R., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.20.20067512 · Cited by 16
Roberts, M. T., Driggs, D., Thorpe, M. S., Gilbey, J., Yeung, M., Ursprung, S., Ai, A.-R., Etmann, C., McCague, C., Beer, L., et al. (2020) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 16
Performance of Two Risk-Stratification Models in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease
Xu, R., Hou, K., Zhang, K., Xu, H., Zhang, N., Fu, H., Xie, L., Sun, R., Wen, L., Liu, H., et al. (2020) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2020.00518 · Cited by 16
High serum nitrates levels in non-survivor COVID-19 patients
Lorente, L., Gómez-Bernal, F., Martin, M. M. I. D. O., Navarro, J. A., Argüeso, M., Pérez, A., Ramos, L., Solé‐Violán, J., y Ramos, J. A. M., Ojeda, N., et al. (2020) · Medicina Intensiva · doi:10.1016/j.medin.2020.10.003 · Cited by 16
Zhang, B., Liu, Q., Zhang, X., Liu, S., Chen, W., You, J., Chen, Q., Li, M., Chen, Z., Chen, L., et al. (2020) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2020.590460 · Cited by 16
Derivation and validation of the clinical prediction model for COVID-19
Foieni, F., Sala, G., Mognarelli, J., Suigo, G., Zampini, D., Pistoia, M., Ciola, M., Ciampani, T., Ultori, C., & Ghiringhelli, P. (2020) · Internal and Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11739-020-02480-3 · Cited by 15
Learning From Past Respiratory Infections to Predict COVID-19 Outcomes: Retrospective Study
Sang, S., Sun, R., Coquet, J., Carmichael, H. L., Seto, T., & Hernandez‐Boussard, T. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/23026 · Cited by 15
Development and Validation of a Diagnostic Nomogram to Predict COVID-19 PneumoniaPreprint
Wang, Z., Weng, J., Li, Z., Hou, R., Zhou, L., Ye, H., Chen, Y., Yang, T., Chen, D., Wang, L., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-22140/v1 · Cited by 15
Liu, Q., Fang, X., Tokuno, S., Chung, U., Chen, X., Dai, X., Liu, X., Xu, F., Wang, B., & Peng, P. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.06.20056127 · Cited by 14
Vizcaychipi, M. P., Shovlin, C. L., McCarthy, A., Howard, A., Brown, A. F., Hayes, M., Singh, S., Christie, L. E., Sisson, A., Davies, R., et al. (2020) · Emergency Medicine Journal · doi:10.1136/emermed-2020-210199 · Cited by 14
Song, C., Dong, Z., Gong, H., Liu, X.-P., Dong, X., Wang, A., Chen, Y., Song, Q., & Hu, W. (2020) · Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1007/s00432-020-03420-6 · Cited by 14
Simple predictive models identify patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and poor prognosis
Riveiro‐Barciela, M., Labrador‐Horrillo, M., Camps-Relats, L., González-Sans, D., Cots, M. V., Terrones-Peinador, M., Conde, A. N., Martínez‐Gallo, M., Hernández-González, M., Antón, A., et al. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0244627 · Cited by 14
van Dam, P. M. E. L., Zelis, N., Stassen, P. M., van Twist, D. J. L., de Leeuw, P. W., van Kuijk, S. M. J., & Buijs, J. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045141 · Cited by 14
Kodama, T., Obinata, H., Mori, H., Murakami, W., Suyama, Y., Sasaki, H., Kouzaki, Y., Kawano, S., Kawana, A., & Mimura, S. (2020) · Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.jiac.2020.12.009 · Cited by 13
Prognostic Value of a Clinical Biochemistry-Based Nomogram for Coronavirus Disease 2019
Yu, J., Nie, L., Wu, D., Chen, J., Yang, Z., Zhang, L., Li, D., & Zhou, X. (2021) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2020.597791 · Cited by 13
Liu, J., Tao, L., Gao, Z., Jiang, R., & Liu, M. (2020) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.103716 · Cited by 12
CD8+ T cells predicted the conversion of common covid-19 to severe
Liu, L., Chen, Z., Du, Y., Gao, J., Li, J., Deng, T., Chen, C., Wang, L., Yang, Y., & Liu, C. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-81732-4 · Cited by 12
Wang, L., Liu, Y., Zhang, T., Jiang, Y., Yang, S., Xu, Y., Song, R., Song, M., Wang, L., Zhang, W., et al. (2020) · Open Forum Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaa169 · Cited by 11
Wang, B., Zhong, F., Zhang, H., An, W., Liao, M., & Cao, Y. (2020) · Japanese Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.7883/yoken.jjid.2020.227 · Cited by 11
Impaired immune and coagulation systems may be early risk factors for COVID-19 patients
Qin, Z., Liu, L., Sun, Q., Li, X., Luo, J., Liu, J., & Liu, D. (2020) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000021700 · Cited by 11
Hassan, H. A., Cocks, E., Jesani, L., Lewis, S., & Szakmány, T. (2020) · Critical Care Explorations · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000000253 · Cited by 11
A Risk Prediction Model for Evaluating the Disease Progression of COVID-19 Pneumonia
Cao, G., Li, P., Chen, Y., Fang, K., Chen, B., Wang, S., Feng, X., Wang, Z., Xiong, M., Zheng, R., et al. (2020) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2020.556886 · Cited by 11
Zhao, B., Wei, Y., Sun, W., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.18.20071019 · Cited by 10
Huang, D., Yang, H., He, Y., Wang, T., Yao, R., & Liang, Z. (2020) · Immunity Inflammation and Disease · doi:10.1002/iid3.353 · Cited by 10
Risk Assessment and Prediction of Severe or Critical COVID-19 Illness in Older Adults
Zhang, X., Zhang, L., Zhao, Y. W., Li, W., Wu, H., Ling, Y., Qian, Z., Jin, Y., Fu, Q.-C., Li, X.-Y., et al. (2020) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s268156 · Cited by 10
Predicting thromboembolic complications in COVID-19 ICU patients using machine learning
van de Sande, D., van Genderen, M. E., Rosman, B., Diether, M., Endeman, H., van den Akker, J. P. C., Ludwig, M., Huiskens, J., Gommers, D. A. M. P. J., & van Bommel, J. (2020) · Journal of Clinical and Translational Research · doi:10.18053/jctres.06.202005.003 · Cited by 10
Wang, C., Deng, R., Gou, L., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.09.20058594 · Cited by 9
TOWARD A COVID-19 SCORE-RISK ASSESSMENTS AND REGISTRYPreprint
Guillamet, C. V., Guillamet, R. V., Kramer, A. A., Maurer, P., Menke, G. A., Hill, C., & Knaus, W. A. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.15.20066860 · Cited by 9
Pre-test probability for SARS-Cov-2-related Infection Score: the PARIS scorePreprint
Tordjman, M., Ahmed, M., Rahul, M. D., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.28.20081687 · Cited by 9
Zhao, B., Wei, Y., Sun, W., Qin, C., Zhou, X., Wang, Z., Li, T., Cao, H., Wang, Y., & Wang, W. (2021) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.601941 · Cited by 9
Limited Utility of SOFA and APACHE II Prediction Models for ICU Triage in Pandemic Influenza
Enfield, K., Miller, R., Rice, T. W., Thompson, B., & Truwit, J. D. (2011) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1378/chest.1118087 · Cited by 8
Lundon, D., Kelly, B. D., Shukla, D. C., Bolton, D. M., Wiklund, P. N., & Tewari, A. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm9092799 · Cited by 8
Kaeuffer, C., Ruch, Y., Fabacher, T., Hinschberger, O., Mootien, J., Eyriey, M., Greigert, V., COVID-19 Alsace Study Group, Gravier, S., Jocelyn, A., et al. (2020) · Open Forum Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaa405 · Cited by 8
Ensemble learning for poor prognosis predictions: A case study on SARS-CoV-2
Wu, H., Zhang, H., Karwath, A., Ibrahim, Z. M., Shi, T., Zhang, X., Wang, K., Sun, J., Dhaliwal, K., Bean, D. M., et al. (2020) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa295 · Cited by 8
Survival prediction algorithms for COVID‐19 patients admitted to a UK district general hospital
Fernandez, A., Obiechina, N., Koh, J., Hong, A., Nandi, A., & Reynolds, T. (2020) · International Journal of Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/ijcp.13974 · Cited by 8
A model to predict SARS-CoV-2 infection based on the first three-month surveillance data in BrazilPreprint
Díaz-Quijano, F. A., da Silva, J. M. N., Ganem, F., de Oliveira, S. B., Vesga-Varela, A. L., & Croda, J. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.05.20047944 · Cited by 7
Fan, T. T., Hao, B., Yang, S., Shen, B., Huang, Z. L., Lu, Z., Xiong, R., Shen, X., Jiang, W., Zhang, L., et al. (2020) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/19588 · Cited by 7
Distinguishing L and H phenotypes of COVID-19 using a single x-ray imagePreprint
Islam, M. T., & Fleischer, J. W. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.27.20081984 · Cited by 6
Xu, R., Cui, J., Liu, H., Wang, Y., Wang, T., Ye, D., Lv, Y., & Liu, Q. (2020) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.26551 · Cited by 6
Zhang, Y., Wu, L., Yang, J., Zhou, C., & Liu, Y. (2020) · Infection and Drug Resistance · doi:10.2147/idr.s261725 · Cited by 6
The mNCP-SPI Score Predicting Risk of Severe COVID-19 among Mild-Pneumonia Patients on Admission
Guo, L., Xiong, W., Liu, D., Feng, Y., Wang, P., Dong, X., Chen, R., Wang, Y., Zhang, L., Huang, J., et al. (2020) · Infection and Drug Resistance · doi:10.2147/idr.s263157 · Cited by 6
An Algorithm for Classifying Patients Most Likely to Develop Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Illness
Kattan, M. W., Ji, X., Milinovich, A., Adegboye, J., Duggal, A., Dweik, R. A., Khouli, H. I., Gordon, S., Young, J. B., & Jehi, L. E. (2020) · Critical Care Explorations · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000000300 · Cited by 6
Marathon and Disaster: Lessons From the 2021 Gansu Marathon
Niu, S., Tian, S., & Zhang, J. (2021) · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness · doi:10.1017/dmp.2021.320 · Cited by 6
Chest CT features and progression of patients with coronavirus disease 2019
Xie, L., Hou, K., Xu, H., Fu, H., Xu, R., Liu, H., Zhou, Z., Li, Z., Yang, M., & Guo, Y. (2020) · British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr.20200219 · Cited by 5
A predictive model for respiratory distress in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study
Zhang, X., Wang, W., Wan, C., Cheng, G., Yin, Y., Cao, K., Zhang, X., Wang, Z., Miao, S., Yu, Y., et al. (2020) · Annals of Translational Medicine · doi:10.21037/atm-20-4977 · Cited by 5
Predicting severe or critical symptoms in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from Yichang, China
Chen, X., Peng, F., Zhou, X., Zhu, J., Chen, X., Gong, Y., Shupeng, W., & Niu, W. (2020) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.202261 · Cited by 5
Zhao, Y., Wang, F., Dong, G., Sheng, Q., & Feng, S. (2020) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 5
Wickstrøm, K. E., Vitelli, V., Carr, E., Holten, A. R., Bendayan, R., Reiner, A. H., Bean, D. M., Searle, T., Shek, A., Kraljević, Ž., et al. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0255748 · Cited by 5
Prediction of the Rehabilitation Duration and Risk Management for Mild-Moderate COVID-19
Zheng, Q.-N., Xu, M., Zheng, Y.-L., Wang, X., & Zhao, H. (2020) · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness · doi:10.1017/dmp.2020.214 · Cited by 4
Xia, Y., Zhang, Y., Yuan, S., Chen, J., Zheng, W., Xu, X., Xie, X., & Zhang, J. (2020) · Clinica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.cca.2020.11.019 · Cited by 3
The CB index predicts prognosis of critically ill COVID-19 patients
Cao, L., Zhang, S., Wang, E., Zhang, Y., Bai, Y., Luo, X., Li, Z., Li, F., Tao, L., & Liu, H. (2020) · Annals of Translational Medicine · doi:10.21037/atm-20-7447 · Cited by 3
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Collins, G. S., Moons, K. G. M., Dhiman, P., Riley, R. D., Beam, A. L., Van Calster, B., Ghassemi, M., Liu, X., Reitsma, J. B., van Smeden, M., et al. (2024) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078378 · Cited by 4,718
Self-citationCoronavirus Disease 2019–COVID-19
Dhama, K., Sharun, K., Tiwari, R., Sircar, S., Bhat, S., Malik, Y. S., Singh, K. P., Chaicumpa, W., Bonilla‐Aldana, D. K., & Rodriguez-Morales, A. J. (2020) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00028-20 · Cited by 1,993
Immunology of COVID-19: Current State of the Science
Vabret, N., Britton, G. J., Gruber, C., Hegde, S., Kim, J., Kuksin, M., Levantovsky, R., Malle, L., Moreira, A., Park, M. D., et al. (2020) · Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2020.05.002 · Cited by 1,623
Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19
Budd, J., Miller, B. S., Manning, E. M., Lampos, V., Zhuang, M., Edelstein, M., Rees, G., Emery, V. C., Stevens, M. M., Keegan, N., et al. (2020) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1011-4 · Cited by 1,195
An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews
van de Schoot, R., de Bruin, J., Schram, R., Zahedi, P., de Boer, J., Weijdema, F., Kramer, B., Huijts, M., Hoogerwerf, M., Ferdinands, G., et al. (2021) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-00287-7 · Cited by 1,157
“NATuRe MAchiNe iNTelligeNce comparison with some of the existing systems, as shown in the last column of Table 1.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Wynants, L., Van Calster, B., Bonten, M. M., Collins, G. S., Debray, T. P., De Vos, M., Haller, M. C., Heinze, G., Moons, K. G., Riley, R. D., Schuit, E., Smits, L. J., Snell, K. I., Steyerberg, E. W., Wallisch, C., & van Smeden, M.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Utrecht University (NL)
- Krankenhaus der Elisabethinen (AT)
- Medical University of Vienna (AT)
- Keele University (GB)
- Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Wynants, Laure
- ORCID
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2020-03-27
- Volume
- 369
- Pages
- m1328-m1328
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7222643
- OpenAlex
- W3014524604
- Cited by
- 3,070
- References
- 433
- Citations by year
- 2026: 191 · 2025: 185 · 2024: 261 · 2023: 402 · 2022: 619 · 2021: 880 · 2020: 531
- FWCI
- 28.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (publishedVersion)
- St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (acceptedVersion)
- Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Cancer Research UK (27294, 16895, C49297/A27294, C49297)
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (SPCR-142, COVID-19, C49297/A27294)
- Department of Health and Social Care (COVID-19)
- European Commission (825746, HORIZON2020, COVID-19)
- ZonMw (91617050, 10430012010001, grant 91617050)
- Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (G0B4716N)
- KU Leuven (C24/15/037)
- Vlaamse regering (C24/15/037)
- Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
- National Institutes of Health (COVID-19)
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (C49297/ A27294)
- NIHR School for Primary Care Research
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R00HL141678)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P20GM125498)
- Interreg
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, prediction model, diagnostic model, prognostic model, risk prediction, model validation, risk of bias, concordance index, diagnostic imaging, disease severity, mortality prediction, intensive care unit admission, hospitalization risk, overfitting, reporting quality, preprints, charm, PROBAST
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, Hospitalization, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Pneumonia, Viral, Prognosis, Multivariate Analysis, Coronavirus, Coronavirus Infections, Disease Progression, Pandemics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
