Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 445

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Towards an Artificial Intelligence Framework for Data-Driven Prediction of Coronavirus Clinical Severity

Open access
Jiang, Xiangao, Coffee, Megan, Bari, Anasse, Wang, Junzhang, Jiang, Xinyue, Huang, Jianping, Shi, Jichan, Dai, Jianyi, Cai, Jing, Zhang, Tianxiao, Wu, Zhengxing, He, Guiqing, Huang, Yitong·2020·Computers, Materials & Continua

Abstract

The virus SARS-CoV2, which causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a pandemic and has spread to every inhabited continent. Given the increasing caseload, there is an urgent need to augment clinical skills in order to identify from among the many mild cases the few that will progress to critical illness. We present a first step towards building an artificial intelligence (AI) framework, with predictive analytics (PA) capabilities applied to real patient data, to provide rapid clinical decision-making support. COVID-19 has presented a pressing need as a) clinicians are still developing clinical acumen to this novel disease and b) resource limitations in a surging pandemic require difficult resource allocation decisions. The objectives of this research are: (1) to algorithmically identify the combinations of clinical characteristics of COVID-19 that predict outcomes, and (2) to develop a tool with AI capabilities that will predict patients at risk for more severe illness on initial presentation. The predictive models learn from historical data to help predict who will develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a severe outcome in COVID-19. Our results, based on data from two hospitals in Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China, identified features on initial presentation with COVID-19 that were most predictive of later development of ARDS. A mildly elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (a liver enzyme), the presence of myalgias (body aches), and an elevated hemoglobin (red blood cells), in this order, are the clinical features, on presentation, that are the most predictive. The predictive models that learned from historical data of patients from these two hospitals achieved 70% to 80% accuracy in predicting severe cases.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.32604/cmc.2020.010691

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 445

Metadata

Authors
Jiang, X., Coffee, M., Bari, A., Wang, J., Jiang, X., Huang, J., Shi, J., Dai, J., Cai, J., Zhang, T., Wu, Z., He, G., & Huang, Y.
Venue
Computers, Materials & Continua
Published
2020
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
537-551
ISSN
  • 1546-2218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-2226
OpenAlex
W3014289208
Cited by
445
References
5
FWCI
12.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Towards an Artificial Intelligence Framework for Data-Driven Prediction of Coronavirus Clinical Severity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.32604/cmc.2020.010691
The paper
Jiang, X., Coffee, M., Bari, A., Wang, J., Jiang, X., Huang, J., Shi, J., Dai, J., Cai, J., Zhang, T., Wu, Z., He, G., & Huang, Y. (2020). Towards an Artificial Intelligence Framework for Data-Driven Prediction of Coronavirus Clinical Severity. Computers, Materials & Continua. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2020.010691

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.