Development and validation of a clinical risk score to predict the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from administrative data: a population-based cohort study from Italy

Orlando, V.; Rea, F.; savare, L.; Guarino, I.; Mucherino, S.; Perrella, A.; Trama, U.; Coscioni, E.; Menditto, E.; Corrao, G.

doi:10.1101/2020.07.23.217331

Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2020.07.23.217331

Development and validation of a clinical risk score to predict the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from administrative data: a population-based cohort study from Italy

Orlando, V.·Rea, F.·savare, L.·Guarino, I.·Mucherino, S.·Perrella, A.·Trama, U.·Coscioni, E.·Menditto, E.·Corrao, G.

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BackgroundThe novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic spread rapidly worldwide increasing exponentially in Italy. To date, there is lack of studies describing clinical characteristics of the population most at risk of infection. Hence, we aimed to identify clinical predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk and to develop and validate a score predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection risk comparing it with unspecific surrogates. MethodsRetrospective case/control study using administrative health-related database was carried out in Southern Italy (Campania region) among beneficiaries of Regional Health Service aged over than 30 years. For each subject with Covid-19 confirmed diagnosis (case), up to five controls were randomly matched for gender, age and municipality of residence. Odds ratios and 90% confidence intervals for associations between candidate predictors and risk of infection were estimated by means of conditional logistic regression. SARS-CoV-2 Infection Score (SIS), was developed by generating a total aggregate score obtained from assignment of a weight at each selected covariate using coefficients estimated from the model. Finally, the score was categorized by assigning increasing values from 1 to 4. SIS was validated by comparison with specific and unspecific predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection. ResultsSubjects suffering from diabetes, anaemias, Parkinsons disease, mental disorders, cardiovascular and inflammatory bowel and kidney diseases showed increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Similar estimates were recorded for men and women and younger and older than 65 years. Fifteen conditions significantly contributed to the SIS. As SIS value increases, risk progressively increases, being odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection among people with the highest SIS value (SIS=4), 1.74 times higher than those unaffected by any SIS contributing conditions (SIS=1). ConclusionThis study identified conditions and diseases making individuals more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our results are a decision-maker support tool for identifying population most at risk allowing adoption of preventive measures to minimize a potential new relapse damage.

Source connections

Published article ↗

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and education Preprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Orlando, V., Rea, F., savare, L., Guarino, I., Mucherino, S., Perrella, A., Trama, U., Coscioni, E., Menditto, E., Corrao, G.. 2020-07-23. Development and validation of a clinical risk score to predict the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from administrative data: a population-based cohort study from Italy. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.23.217331

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2020

A laboratory module that explores RNA interference and codon optimization through fluorescence microscopy using Caenorhabditis elegans

Scientific research experiences are beneficial to students allowing them to gain laboratory and problem-solving skills, as well as foundational research skills in a team-based setting. We designed a laboratory module to provide a guided research experience to stimulate curiosity, introduce students to experimental techniques, and provide students with foundational skills needed for higher levels of guided inquiry. In this laboratory module, students learn about RNA interference (RNAi) and codon optimization using the research organism Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans). Students are given the opportunity to perform a commonly used method of gene downregulation in C. elegans where they visualize gene depletion using fluorescence microscopy and quantify the efficacy of depletion using quantitative image analysis. The module presented here educates students on how to report their results and findings by generating publication quality figures and figure legends. The activities outlined exemplify ways by which students can improve their critical thinking, data interpretation, and technical skills, all of which are beneficial for future laboratory classes, independent inquiry-based research projects, and careers in the life sciences and beyond.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2020

From amazing work to I beg to differ - analysis of bioRxiv preprints that received one public comment till September 2019

While early commenting on studies is seen as one of the advantages of preprints, the nature of such comments, and the people who post them, have not been systematically explored. We analysed comments posted between 21 May 2015 and 9 September 2019 for 1,983 bioRxiv preprints that received only one comment. Sixty-nine percent of comments were posted by non-authors (n=1,366), and 31% by preprint authors (n=617). Twelve percent of non-author comments (n=168) were full review reports traditionally found during journal review, while the rest most commonly contained praises (n=577, 42%), suggestions (n=399, 29%), or criticisms (n=226, 17%). Authors comments most commonly contained publication status updates (n=354, 57%), additional study information (n=158, 26%), or solicited feedback for the preprints (n=65, 11%). Our study points to the value of preprint commenting, but further studies are needed to determine the role that comments play in shaping preprint versions and eventual journal publications.

scientific communication and education↗