Gender and sex bias in COVID-19 epidemiological data through the lens of causality.

The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a large amount of experimental and observational studies reporting clear correlation between the risk of developing severe COVID-19 (or dying from it) and whether the individual is male or female. This paper is an attempt to explain the supposed male vulnerability to COVID-19 using a causal approach. We proceed by identifying a set of confounding and mediating factors, based on the review of epidemiological literature and analysis of sex-dis-aggregated data. Those factors are then taken into consideration to produce explainable and fair prediction and decision models from observational data. The paper outlines how non-causal models can motivate discriminatory policies such as biased allocation of the limited resources in intensive care units (ICUs). The objective is to anticipate and avoid disparate impact and discrimination, by considering causal knowledge and causal-based techniques to compliment the collection and analysis of observational big-data. The hope is to contribute to more careful use of health related information access systems for developing fair and robust predictive models.

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus first-generation basal insulin analogues in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes: 12-month outcomes of ACHIEVE Control, a prospective, randomized, pragmatic real-life clinical trial.

AIM: To report the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus standard-of-care basal insulin analogues (SOC-BI) at 12 months in the ACHIEVE Control trial, which is a prospective pragmatic randomized real-life study in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A total of 3304 insulin-naïve adults with T2D and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration of 64 to 97 mmol/mol (8.0% to 11.0%) after ≥1 year of treatment with two or more antihyperglycaemic agents were randomized to Gla-300 or SOC-BI. Key secondary endpoints included HbA1c target attainment without documented symptomatic (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia at 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, 26.1% (Gla-300) and 23.7% (SOC-BI) of adults achieved HbA1c targets without documented symptomatic (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.35); 33.0% and 29.5%, respectively, achieved HbA1c targets without documented symptomatic (<3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.38). The OR for HbA1c target achievement was 1.15 (95% CI 0.99-1.34), and favoured Gla-300 versus SOC-BI for absence of documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycaemia at 12 months for both ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL; OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.40) and < 3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.48). CONCLUSION: Gla-300 tended to be associated with lower hypoglycaemia risk than SOC-BI in real-world clinical practice during the 12-month follow-up.