Developing and validating COVID-19 adverse outcome risk prediction models from a bi-national European cohort of 5594 patients.

Patients with severe COVID-19 have overwhelmed healthcare systems worldwide. We hypothesized that machine learning (ML) models could be used to predict risks at different stages of management and thereby provide insights into drivers and prognostic markers of disease progression and death. From a cohort of approx. 2.6 million citizens in Denmark, SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests were performed on subjects suspected for COVID-19 disease; 3944 cases had at least one positive test and were subjected to further analysis. SARS-CoV-2 positive cases from the United Kingdom Biobank was used for external validation. The ML models predicted the risk of death (Receiver Operation Characteristics-Area Under the Curve, ROC-AUC) of 0.906 at diagnosis, 0.818, at hospital admission and 0.721 at Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Similar metrics were achieved for predicted risks of hospital and ICU admission and use of mechanical ventilation. Common risk factors, included age, body mass index and hypertension, although the top risk features shifted towards markers of shock and organ dysfunction in ICU patients. The external validation indicated fair predictive performance for mortality prediction, but suboptimal performance for predicting ICU admission. ML may be used to identify drivers of progression to more severe disease and for prognostication patients in patients with COVID-19. We provide access to an online risk calculator based on these findings.

Is artificial intelligence magic dust for big-science facilities?

AI is no magic dust: for it to become a true discovery accelerator, much work is needed to make it transparent and robust.

Relationship Between Media Coverage and Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) Vaccination Uptake in Denmark: Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the influence of media coverage upon vaccination activity is valuable when designing outreach campaigns to increase vaccination uptake. OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between media coverage and vaccination activity of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine in Denmark. METHODS: We retrieved data on media coverage (1622 articles), vaccination activity (2 million individual registrations), and incidence of measles for the period 1997-2014. All 1622 news media articles were annotated as being provaccination, antivaccination, or neutral. Seasonal and serial dependencies were removed from the data, after which cross-correlations were analyzed to determine the relationship between the different signals. RESULTS: Most (65%) of the anti-vaccination media coverage was observed in the period 1997-2004, immediately before and following the 1998 publication of the falsely claimed link between autism and the MMR vaccine. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the first MMR vaccine (targeting children aged 15 months) and provaccination media coverage (r=.49, P=.004) in the period 1998-2004. In this period the first MMR vaccine and neutral media coverage also correlated (r=.45, P=.003). However, looking at the whole period, 1997-2014, we found no significant correlations between vaccination activity and media coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Following the falsely claimed link between autism and the MMR vaccine, provaccination and neutral media coverage correlated with vaccination activity. This correlation was only observed during a period of controversy which indicates that the population is more susceptible to media influence when presented with diverging opinions. Additionally, our findings suggest that the influence of media is stronger on parents when they are deciding on the first vaccine of their children, than on the subsequent vaccine because correlations were only found for the first MMR vaccine.

FindZebra: a search engine for rare diseases.

BACKGROUND: The web has become a primary information resource about illnesses and treatments for both medical and non-medical users. Standard web search is by far the most common interface to this information. It is therefore of interest to find out how well web search engines work for diagnostic queries and what factors contribute to successes and failures. Among diseases, rare (or orphan) diseases represent an especially challenging and thus interesting class to diagnose as each is rare, diverse in symptoms and usually has scattered resources associated with it. METHODS: We design an evaluation approach for web search engines for rare disease diagnosis which includes 56 real life diagnostic cases, performance measures, information resources and guidelines for customising Google Search to this task. In addition, we introduce FindZebra, a specialized (vertical) rare disease search engine. FindZebra is powered by open source search technology and uses curated freely available online medical information. RESULTS: FindZebra outperforms Google Search in both default set-up and customised to the resources used by FindZebra. We extend FindZebra with specialized functionalities exploiting medical ontological information and UMLS medical concepts to demonstrate different ways of displaying the retrieved results to medical experts. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a specialized search engine can improve the diagnostic quality without compromising the ease of use of the currently widely popular standard web search. The proposed evaluation approach can be valuable for future development and benchmarking. The FindZebra search engine is available at http://www.findzebra.com/.

Specialized tools are needed when searching the web for rare disease diagnoses.

In our recent paper, we study web search as an aid in the process of diagnosing rare diseases. To answer the question of how well Google Search and PubMed perform, we created an evaluation framework with 56 diagnostic cases and made our own specialized search engine, FindZebra (findzebra.com). FindZebra uses a set of publicly available curated sources on rare diseases and an open-source information retrieval system, Indri. Our evaluation and the feedback received after the publication of our paper both show that FindZebra outperforms Google Search and PubMed. In this paper, we summarize the original findings and the response to FindZebra, discuss why Google Search is not designed for specialized tasks and outline some of the current trends in using web resources and social media for medical diagnosis.