Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform
<strong>Background</strong> Obtaining accurate estimates of the risk of COVID-19-related death in the general population is challenging in the context of changing levels of circulating infection. <br> <strong>Methods</strong> We propose a modelling approach to predict 2...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
| _version_ | 1817931270375604224 |
|---|---|
| author | Williamson, EJ Tazare, J Bhaskaran, K McDonald, HI Walker, AJ Tomlinson, L Wing, K Bacon, S Bates, C Curtis, HJ Forbes, HJ Minassian, C Morton, CE Nightingale, E Mehrkar, A Evans, D Nicholson, BD Leon, DA Inglesby, P MacKenna, B Davies, NG DeVito, NJ Drysdale, H Cockburn, J Hulme, WJ Morley, J Douglas, I Rentsch, CT Mathur, R Wong, A Schultze, A Croker, R Parry, J Hester, F Harper, S Grieve, R Harrison, DA Steyerberg, EW Eggo, RM Diaz-Ordaz, K Keogh, R Evans, SJW Smeeth, L Goldacre, B |
| author2 | OpenSAFELY Collaborative |
| author_facet | OpenSAFELY Collaborative Williamson, EJ Tazare, J Bhaskaran, K McDonald, HI Walker, AJ Tomlinson, L Wing, K Bacon, S Bates, C Curtis, HJ Forbes, HJ Minassian, C Morton, CE Nightingale, E Mehrkar, A Evans, D Nicholson, BD Leon, DA Inglesby, P MacKenna, B Davies, NG DeVito, NJ Drysdale, H Cockburn, J Hulme, WJ Morley, J Douglas, I Rentsch, CT Mathur, R Wong, A Schultze, A Croker, R Parry, J Hester, F Harper, S Grieve, R Harrison, DA Steyerberg, EW Eggo, RM Diaz-Ordaz, K Keogh, R Evans, SJW Smeeth, L Goldacre, B |
| author_sort | Williamson, EJ |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <strong>Background</strong>
Obtaining accurate estimates of the risk of COVID-19-related death in the general population is challenging in the context of changing levels of circulating infection.
<br>
<strong>Methods</strong>
We propose a modelling approach to predict 28-day COVID-19-related death which explicitly accounts for COVID-19 infection prevalence using a series of sub-studies from new landmark times incorporating time-updating proxy measures of COVID-19 infection prevalence. This was compared with an approach ignoring infection prevalence.
<br>
The target population was adults registered at a general practice in England in March 2020. The outcome was 28-day COVID-19-related death. Predictors included demographic characteristics and comorbidities. Three proxies of local infection prevalence were used: model-based estimates, rate of COVID-19-related attendances in emergency care, and rate of suspected COVID-19 cases in primary care.
<br>
We used data within the TPP SystmOne electronic health record system linked to Office for National Statistics mortality data, using the OpenSAFELY platform, working on behalf of NHS England.
<br>
Prediction models were developed in case-cohort samples with a 100-day follow-up. Validation was undertaken in 28-day cohorts from the target population. We considered predictive performance (discrimination and calibration) in geographical and temporal subsets of data not used in developing the risk prediction models. Simple models were contrasted to models including a full range of predictors.
<br>
<strong>Results</strong>
Prediction models were developed on 11,972,947 individuals, of whom 7999 experienced COVID-19-related death. All models discriminated well between individuals who did and did not experience the outcome, including simple models adjusting only for basic demographics and number of comorbidities: C-statistics 0.92–0.94. However, absolute risk estimates were substantially miscalibrated when infection prevalence was not explicitly modelled.
<br>
<strong>Conclusions</strong>
Our proposed models allow absolute risk estimation in the context of changing infection prevalence but predictive performance is sensitive to the proxy for infection prevalence. Simple models can provide excellent discrimination and may simplify implementation of risk prediction tools. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:09:53Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:dcb91a38-4972-4f1c-975c-33a5012765d7 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-09T03:19:21Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | BioMed Central |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:dcb91a38-4972-4f1c-975c-33a5012765d72024-10-31T13:00:56ZComparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platformJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:dcb91a38-4972-4f1c-975c-33a5012765d7EnglishSymplectic ElementsBioMed Central2022Williamson, EJTazare, JBhaskaran, KMcDonald, HIWalker, AJTomlinson, LWing, KBacon, SBates, CCurtis, HJForbes, HJMinassian, CMorton, CENightingale, EMehrkar, AEvans, DNicholson, BDLeon, DAInglesby, PMacKenna, BDavies, NGDeVito, NJDrysdale, HCockburn, JHulme, WJMorley, JDouglas, IRentsch, CTMathur, RWong, ASchultze, ACroker, RParry, JHester, FHarper, SGrieve, RHarrison, DASteyerberg, EWEggo, RMDiaz-Ordaz, KKeogh, REvans, SJWSmeeth, LGoldacre, BOpenSAFELY Collaborative<strong>Background</strong> Obtaining accurate estimates of the risk of COVID-19-related death in the general population is challenging in the context of changing levels of circulating infection. <br> <strong>Methods</strong> We propose a modelling approach to predict 28-day COVID-19-related death which explicitly accounts for COVID-19 infection prevalence using a series of sub-studies from new landmark times incorporating time-updating proxy measures of COVID-19 infection prevalence. This was compared with an approach ignoring infection prevalence. <br> The target population was adults registered at a general practice in England in March 2020. The outcome was 28-day COVID-19-related death. Predictors included demographic characteristics and comorbidities. Three proxies of local infection prevalence were used: model-based estimates, rate of COVID-19-related attendances in emergency care, and rate of suspected COVID-19 cases in primary care. <br> We used data within the TPP SystmOne electronic health record system linked to Office for National Statistics mortality data, using the OpenSAFELY platform, working on behalf of NHS England. <br> Prediction models were developed in case-cohort samples with a 100-day follow-up. Validation was undertaken in 28-day cohorts from the target population. We considered predictive performance (discrimination and calibration) in geographical and temporal subsets of data not used in developing the risk prediction models. Simple models were contrasted to models including a full range of predictors. <br> <strong>Results</strong> Prediction models were developed on 11,972,947 individuals, of whom 7999 experienced COVID-19-related death. All models discriminated well between individuals who did and did not experience the outcome, including simple models adjusting only for basic demographics and number of comorbidities: C-statistics 0.92–0.94. However, absolute risk estimates were substantially miscalibrated when infection prevalence was not explicitly modelled. <br> <strong>Conclusions</strong> Our proposed models allow absolute risk estimation in the context of changing infection prevalence but predictive performance is sensitive to the proxy for infection prevalence. Simple models can provide excellent discrimination and may simplify implementation of risk prediction tools. |
| spellingShingle | Williamson, EJ Tazare, J Bhaskaran, K McDonald, HI Walker, AJ Tomlinson, L Wing, K Bacon, S Bates, C Curtis, HJ Forbes, HJ Minassian, C Morton, CE Nightingale, E Mehrkar, A Evans, D Nicholson, BD Leon, DA Inglesby, P MacKenna, B Davies, NG DeVito, NJ Drysdale, H Cockburn, J Hulme, WJ Morley, J Douglas, I Rentsch, CT Mathur, R Wong, A Schultze, A Croker, R Parry, J Hester, F Harper, S Grieve, R Harrison, DA Steyerberg, EW Eggo, RM Diaz-Ordaz, K Keogh, R Evans, SJW Smeeth, L Goldacre, B Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title | Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title_full | Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title_short | Comparison of methods for predicting COVID-19-related death in the general population using the OpenSAFELY platform |
| title_sort | comparison of methods for predicting covid 19 related death in the general population using the opensafely platform |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT williamsonej comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT tazarej comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT bhaskarank comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT mcdonaldhi comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT walkeraj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT tomlinsonl comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT wingk comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT bacons comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT batesc comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT curtishj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT forbeshj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT minassianc comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT mortonce comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT nightingalee comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT mehrkara comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT evansd comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT nicholsonbd comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT leonda comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT inglesbyp comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT mackennab comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT daviesng comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT devitonj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT drysdaleh comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT cockburnj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT hulmewj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT morleyj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT douglasi comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT rentschct comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT mathurr comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT wonga comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT schultzea comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT crokerr comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT parryj comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT hesterf comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT harpers comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT griever comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT harrisonda comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT steyerbergew comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT eggorm comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT diazordazk comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT keoghr comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT evanssjw comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT smeethl comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform AT goldacreb comparisonofmethodsforpredictingcovid19relateddeathinthegeneralpopulationusingtheopensafelyplatform |