Evidence Hub

Predicting clinical outcomes at hospital admission of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia using artificial intelligence: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial

C. C. S. ConceiÇão, C. M. Martins, Mayck Medeiros Silva, H. C. de Castro Faria, Davide Chiumello, P. R. Rocco, Fernanda Ferreira Cruz, P. L. Silva

Frontiers in Medicine, 2025

203 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background Predicting clinical improvement after hospital admission in patients with COVID-19 is crucial for effective resource allocation. Machine-learning tools can help identify patients likely to show clinical improvement based on real-world data. This study used two approaches—least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and CombiROC—to identify predictive variables at hospital admission for detecting clinical improvement after 7 days. Methods A secondary analysis was conducted on the modified intention-to-treat placebo group from a previous randomized clinical trial (RCT, NCT04561219) of patients with COVID-19. The analysis assessed clinical, laboratory, and blood markers at admission to predict clinical improvement, defined as a two-point increase on the World Health Organization clinical progression scale after 7 days. LASSO and CombiROC were used to select optimal predictive variables. The Youden criteria identified the best threshold for different variable combinations, which were then compared based on the highest area under the curve (AUC) and accuracy. AUCs were compared using DeLong’s algorithm. Results Overall, 203 patients were included in the analysis, and they were divided into two groups; clinical improvement (n = 154) and no clinical improvement (n = 49). The median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 46–66 years); 65% were male. LASSO identified three predictive variables (SaO2, hematocrit, and interleukin [IL]-13) with high sensitivity of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 203 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free