ABSTRACT
BackgroundFew datasets have been established that capture the full breadth of COVID-19 patient interactions with a health system. Our first objective was to create a COVID-19 dataset that linked primary care data to COVID-19 testing, hospitalisation, and mortality data at a patient level. Our second objective was to provide a descriptive analysis of COVID-19 outcomes among the general population and describe the characteristics of the affected individuals. MethodsWe mapped patient-level data from Catalonia, Spain, to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM). More than 3,000 data quality checks were performed to assess the readiness of the database for research. Subsequently, to summarise the COVID-19 population captured, we established a general population cohort as of the 1st March 2020 and identified outpatient COVID-19 diagnoses or positive test results for SARS-CoV-2, hospitalisations with COVID-19, and COVID-19 deaths during follow-up, which went up until 30th June 2021. FindingsMapping data to the OMOP CDM was performed and high data quality was observed. The mapped database was used to identify a total of 5,870,274 individuals, who were included in the general population cohort as of 1st March 2020. Over follow up, 604,472 had either an outpatient COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test result, 58,991 had a hospitalisation with COVID-19, 5,642 had an ICU admission with COVID-19, and 11,233 had a COVID-19 death. People who were hospitalised or died were more commonly older, male, and with more comorbidities. Those admitted to ICU with COVID-19 were generally younger and more often male than those hospitalised in general and those who died. InterpretationWe have established a comprehensive dataset that captures COVID-19 diagnoses, test results, hospitalisations, and deaths in Catalonia, Spain. Extensive data checks have shown the data to be fit for use. From this dataset, a general population cohort of 5.9 million individuals was identified and their COVID-19 outcomes over time were described. FundingGeneralitat de Catalunya and European Health Data and Evidence Network (EHDEN).
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesTo investigate how incidence trends of anxiety and depressive disorders have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. DesignPopulation-based cohort study. SettingObservational cohort study from 2018 to 2021 using the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database in Catalonia, Spain. Participants4,255,847 individuals aged 18 or older in SIDIAP on 1 March, 2018 with no prior history of anxiety and depressive disorders. Primary and secondary outcomes measuresIncidence of anxiety and depressive disorders prior to COVID-19 (March, 2018 to February, 2020), during the COVID-19 lockdown (March to June, 2020) and post-lockdown periods (from July, 2020 to March, 2021) were calculated. Forecasted rates over COVID-19 periods were estimated using negative binomial regression models based on previous data. The percentage reduction was estimated by comparing forecasted versus observed events, overall and by age, sex and socioeconomic status. ResultsThe incidence rates per 100,000 person-months of anxiety and depressive disorders were 171.0 (95%CI: 170.2-171.8) and 46.6 (46.2-47.0), respectively, during the pre-lockdown period. We observed an increase of 39.7% (95%PI: 26.5 to 53.3) in incident anxiety diagnoses compared to the expected in March, 2020, followed by a reduction of 16.9% (8.6 to 24.5) during the post-lockdown periods. A reduction of incident depressive disorders occurred during the lockdown and post-lockdown periods (46.6% [38.9 to 53.1] and 23.2% [12.0 to 32.7], respectively). Reductions were higher among adults aged 18 to 34 and individuals living in most deprived areas. ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic in Catalonia was associated with an initial increase in anxiety disorders diagnosed in primary care, but a reduction in cases as the pandemic continued. Diagnoses of depressive disorders were lower than expected throughout the pandemic. Summary boxO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABS- While previous self-reported studies have provided evidence of increased mental health burden during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of studies observed that fewer diagnoses were made in primary care settings than would have been expected during the initial stages of the pandemic. - Population data that examine the impact of COVID-19 on temporal trends of incident cases of common mental health disorders are lacking in Catalonia, Spain. What this study adds- This study has quantified the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on trends of incidence of anxiety and depressive disorders among adults living in Catalonia. - Reductions in incident cases of anxiety and depressive disorders were higher for young adults and people living in most deprived areas. - Incident diagnoses of anxiety and depressive disorders have not been fully recovered to what would have been expected.
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesTo investigate the associations between cancer and risk of outpatient COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation, and COVID-19-related death, overall and by years since cancer diagnosis (<1-year, 1-5-years, >5-years), sex, age, and cancer type. DesignPopulation-based cohort study SettingPrimary care electronic health records including [~]80% of the population in Catalonia, Spain, linked to hospital and mortality records between 1 March and 6 May 2020. ParticipantsIndividuals aged [≥]18 years with at least one year of prior medical history available from the general population. Cancer was defined as any prior diagnosis of a primary invasive malignancy excluding non-melanoma skin cancer. Main outcome measuresCause-specific hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals for each outcome. Estimates were adjusted by age, sex, deprivation, smoking status, and comorbidities. ResultsWe included 4,618,377 adults, of which 260,667 (5.6%) had a history of cancer. Patients with cancer were older and had more comorbidities than cancer-free patients. A total of 98,951 individuals (5.5% with cancer) were diagnosed and 6,355 (16.4% with cancer) were directly hospitalised (no prior diagnosis) with COVID-19. Of those diagnosed, 6,851 were subsequently hospitalised (10.7% with cancer) and 3,227 died without being hospitalised (18.5% with cancer). Among those hospitalised, 1,963 (22.5% with cancer) died. Cancer was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (aHR: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [1.05-1.11]); direct COVID-19 hospitalisation (1.33 [1.24-1.43]); and death following a COVID-19 hospitalisation (1.12 [1.01-1.25]). These associations were stronger for patients recently diagnosed with cancer, aged <70 years, and with haematological cancers. ConclusionsPatients recently diagnosed with cancer, aged <70 years, or with haematological cancers are a high-risk population for COVID-19 diagnosis and severity. These patients should be prioritised in COVID-19 vaccination campaigns and continued non-pharmaceutical interventions. What is already known on this subjectO_LIPrior studies addressing the relationship between cancer and COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes have found conflicting results C_LIO_LIThe majority of these studies had small sample sizes, were not population-based (i.e. restricted to hospitalised patients), thus increasing the risks of selection and collider bias. C_LIO_LIIn addition, they used different definitions for cancer (i.e. some included only patients with active cancer, while others focused on specific cancer types, etc.), which limits the comparability of their findings, and only a few analysed the effect of cancer across different patient subgroups. C_LI What this study addsO_LIWe conducted a population-based cohort study to analyse the associations between having a prior diagnosis of cancer and the risks of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation and COVID-19-related deaths from 1 March to 6 May 2020. C_LIO_LIIn a population of 4,618,377 adults, we found that cancer was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (aHR: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [1.05-1.11]); direct COVID-19 hospitalisation (1.33 [1.24-1.43]); and death following a COVID-19 hospitalisation (1.12 [1.01-1.25]). C_LIO_LIThese risks were higher for patients recently diagnosed with cancer (within the last year), younger than 70 years, or with haematological cancers. We also found a particularly high risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death among patients with lung and bladder cancer. C_LI
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) has been reported among individuals vaccinated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines. In this study we describe the background incidence of TTS in 6 European countries. MethodsElectronic medical records from France, Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom informed the study. Incidence rates of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and stroke, all with concurrent thrombocytopenia, were estimated among the general population between 2017 to 2019. A range of additional adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccinations were also studied in a similar manner. FindingsA total of 25,432,658 individuals were included. Background rates ranged from 1.0 (0.7 to 1.4) to 8.5 (7.4 to 9.9) per 100,000 person-years for DVT with thrombocytopenia, from 0.5 (0.3 to 0.6) to 20.8 (18.9 to 22.8) for PE with thrombocytopenia, from 0.1 (0.0 to 0.1) to 2.5 (2.2 to 2.7) for SVT with thrombocytopenia, and from 0.2 (0.0 to 0.4) to 30.9 (28.6 to 33.3) for stroke with thrombocytopenia. CVST with thrombocytopenia was only identified in one database, with incidence rate of 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2) per 100,000 person-years. The incidence of TTS increased with age, with those affected typically having more comorbidities and greater medication use than the general population. TTS was also more often seen in men than women. A sizeable proportion of those affected were seen to have been taking antithrombotic and anticoagulant therapies prior to their TTS event. InterpretationAlthough rates vary across databases, TTS has consistently been seen to be a very rare event among the general population. While still very rare, rates of TTS are typically higher among older individuals, and those affected were also seen to generally be male and have more comorbidities and greater medication use than the general population. FundingThis study was funded by the European Medicines Agency (EMA/2017/09/PE Lot 3).
ABSTRACT
Alpha-1 blockers, often used to treat benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), have been hypothesized to prevent COVID-19 complications by minimising cytokine storms release. We conducted a prevalent-user active-comparator cohort study to assess association between alpha-1 blocker use and risks of three COVID-19 outcomes: diagnosis, hospitalization, and hospitalization requiring intensive services. Our study included 2.6 and 0.46 million users of alpha-1 blockers and of alternative BPH therapy during the period between November 2019 and January 2020, found in electronic health records from Spain (SIDIAP) and the United States (Department of Veterans Affairs, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, IQVIA OpenClaims, Optum DOD, Optum EHR). We estimated hazard ratios using state-of-the-art techniques to minimize potential confounding, including large-scale propensity score matching/stratification and negative control calibration. We found no differential risk for any of COVID-19 outcome, pointing to the need for further research on potential COVID-19 therapies.
ABSTRACT
PurposeWe aimed to describe the demographics, cancer subtypes, comorbidities and outcomes of patients with a history of cancer with COVID-19 from March to June 2020. Secondly, we compared patients hospitalized with COVID-19 to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and patients hospitalized with influenza. MethodsWe conducted a cohort study using eight routinely-collected healthcare databases from Spain and the US, standardized to the Observational Medical Outcome Partnership common data model. Three cohorts of patients with a history of cancer were included: i) diagnosed with COVID-19, ii) hospitalized with COVID-19, and iii) hospitalized with influenza in 2017-2018. Patients were followed from index date to 30 days or death. We reported demographics, cancer subtypes, comorbidities, and 30-day outcomes. ResultsWe included 118,155 patients with a cancer history in the COVID-19 diagnosed and 41,939 in the COVID-19 hospitalized cohorts. The most frequent cancer subtypes were prostate and breast cancer (range: 5-19% and 1-14% in the diagnosed cohort, respectively). Hematological malignancies were also frequent, with non-Hodgkins lymphoma being among the 5 most common cancer subtypes in the diagnosed cohort. Overall, patients were more frequently aged above 65 years and had multiple comorbidities. Occurrence of death ranged from 8% to 14% and from 18% to 26% in the diagnosed and hospitalized COVID-19 cohorts, respectively. Patients hospitalized with influenza (n=242,960) had a similar distribution of cancer subtypes, sex, age and comorbidities but lower occurrence of adverse events. ConclusionPatients with a history of cancer and COVID-19 have advanced age, multiple comorbidities, and a high occurence of COVID-19-related events. Additionaly, hematological malignancies were frequent in these patients.This observational study provides epidemiologic characteristics that can inform clinical care and future etiological studies.
ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo investigate associations between body mass index (BMI) and risk of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation with COVID-19, and COVID-19-related death, accounting for potential effect modification by age and sex. DesignPopulation-based cohort study. SettingPrimary care records covering >80% of the Catalonian population (Spain), linked to region-wide testing, hospital, and mortality records from March to May 2020. ParticipantsPeople aged [≥]18 years with at least one measurement of weight and height from the general population and with at least one year of prior medical history available. Main outcome measuresCause-specific hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals for each outcome. ResultsOverall, 2,524,926 participants were followed up for a median of 67 days. A total of 57,443 individuals were diagnosed with COVID-19, 10,862 were hospitalised with COVID-19, and 2,467 had a COVID-19-related death. BMI was positively associated with being diagnosed as well as hospitalised with COVID-19. Compared to a BMI of 22kg/m2, the HR (95%CI) of a BMI of 31kg/m2 was 1.22 (1.19-1.24) for COVID-19 diagnosis, and 1.88 (1.75-2.03) and 2.01 (1.86-2.18) for hospitalisation without and with a prior outpatient diagnosis, respectively. The relation between BMI and risk of COVID-19 related death was J-shaped. There was a modestly higher risk of death among individuals with BMIs[≤]19 kg/m2 and a more pronounced increasing risk for BMIs [≥]37 kg/m2 and [≥]40 kg/m2 among those who were previously hospitalised with COVID-19 and diagnosed with COVID-19 in outpatient settings, respectively. The increase in risk for COVID-19 outcomes was particularly pronounced among younger patients. ConclusionsThere is a monotonic association between BMI and COVID-19 infection and hospitalisation risks, but a J-shaped one with mortality. More research is needed to unravel the mechanisms underlying these relationships. Summary boxesO_ST_ABSSection 1: What is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LIA high body mass index (BMI) has previously been associated in a linear and non-linear fashion with an increased risk of multiple health outcomes; these associations may vary by individual factors such as age and sex. C_LIO_LIObesity has been identified as a risk factor for COVID-19 severity and mortality. However, the role of general adiposity in relation to COVID-19 outcomes has mostly been studied by dichotomizing BMI (below or above 30 kg/m2) or by a diagnostic code indicating obesity. C_LIO_LITwo studies have investigated BMI (as a continuous variable) in relation to COVID-19 outcomes, accounting for non-linearity: one conducted in a tested population sample of the UK Biobank found BMI is related in a dose-response manner with the risk of testing positive for COVID-19; another conducted in a hospital setting in New York reported a J-shaped association between BMI and the risk of intubation or death. These studies were limited in sample size and were prone to collider bias due to the participants restriction to tested and hospitalised patients. No studies have described the association between BMI and COVID-19 outcomes across the natural history of the disease (from no disease to symptomatic disease, hospitalisation, and mortality) using data from diverse health settings. C_LI Section 2: What this study addsO_LIWe provide a comprehensive analysis of the association between BMI and the course of the COVID-19 disease in the general population of a Spanish region during the first wave of the pandemic, using linked data capturing outpatient clinical diagnoses, RT-PCR test results, hospitalisations, and mortality (inside and outside of the hospital setting). C_LIO_LIWe found that BMI is positively associated with being diagnosed as well as hospitalised with COVID-19, and is linked in a J-shaped fashion with the risk of COVID-19 related death. C_LIO_LIThe association between BMI and COVID-19 related outcomes is modified by age and sex; particularly, the risk of COVID-19 outcomes related to increased BMI is higher for those aged between 18 and 59 years, compared to those in older age groups. C_LI
ABSTRACT
In this work, we introduce a technique to choose polarization functions directly from the primitive set of Gaussian exponent without the necessity to optimize or even reoptimized them. For this purpose, initially, we employed Gaussian basis sets generated by using the Polynomial Generator Coordinate Hartree-Fock (PGCHF) method, and later we extended our technique to the cc-pVQZ and pc-3 Gaussian basis sets in order to show how our technique works and how good it is. Using the new polarized basis sets, from our technique, total electronic energies, equilibrium geometries, and vibrational frequencies were calculated for a set of molecules containing atoms from H(Z = 1) to Ba(Z = 56). The technique presented here can be used with any Gaussian basis set flexible (large) enough and also can be used to choose Gaussian basis set exponents from one basis set to another as polarization functions.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe natural history of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has yet to be fully described, with most previous reports focusing on hospitalised patients. Using linked patient-level data, we set out to describe the associations between age, gender, and comorbidities and the risk of outpatient COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation, and/or related mortality. MethodsA population-based cohort study including all individuals registered in Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP). SIDIAP includes primary care records covering > 80% of the population of Catalonia, Spain, and was linked to region-wide testing, hospital and mortality records. Outpatient diagnoses of COVID-19, hospitalisations with COVID-19, and deaths with COVID-19 were identified between 1st March and 6th May 2020. A multi-state model was used, with cause-specific Cox survival models estimated for each transition. FindingsA total of 5,627,520 individuals were included. Of these, 109,367 had an outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19, 18,019 were hospitalised with COVID-19, and 5,585 died after either being diagnosed or hospitalised with COVID-19. Half of those who died were not admitted to hospital prior to their death. Risk of a diagnosis with COVID-19 peaked first in middle-age and then again for oldest ages, risk for hospitalisation after diagnosis peaked around 70 years old, with all other risks highest at oldest ages. Male gender was associated with an increased risk for all outcomes other than outpatient diagnosis. The comorbidities studied (autoimmune condition, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, heart disease, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, malignant neoplasm, obesity, and type 2 diabetes) were all associated with worse outcomes. InterpretationThere is a continued need to protect those at high risk of poor outcomes, particularly the elderly, from COVID-19 and provide appropriate care for those who develop symptomatic disease. While risks of hospitalisation and death are lower for younger populations, there is a need to limit their role in community transmission. These findings should inform public health strategies, including future vaccination campaigns.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 is straining healthcare systems globally. The burden on hospitals during the pandemic could be reduced by implementing prediction models that can discriminate between patients requiring hospitalization and those who do not. The COVID-19 vulnerability (C-19) index, a model that predicts which patients will be admitted to hospital for treatment of pneumonia or pneumonia proxies, has been developed and proposed as a valuable tool for decision making during the pandemic. However, the model is at high risk of bias according to the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool and has not been externally validated. MethodsWe followed the OHDSI framework for external validation to assess the reliability of the C-19 model. We evaluated the model on two different target populations: i) 41,381 patients that have SARS-CoV-2 at an outpatient or emergency room visit and ii) 9,429,285 patients that have influenza or related symptoms during an outpatient or emergency room visit, to predict their risk of hospitalization with pneumonia during the following 0 to 30 days. In total we validated the model across a network of 14 databases spanning the US, Europe, Australia and Asia. FindingsThe internal validation performance of the C-19 index was a c-statistic of 0.73 and calibration was not reported by the authors. When we externally validated it by transporting it to SARS-CoV-2 data the model obtained c-statistics of 0.36, 0.53 (0.473-0.584) and 0.56 (0.488-0.636) on Spanish, US and South Korean datasets respectively. The calibration was poor with the model under-estimating risk. When validated on 12 datasets containing influenza patients across the OHDSI network the c-statistics ranged between 0.40-0.68. InterpretationThe results show that the discriminative performance of the C-19 model is low for influenza cohorts, and even worse amongst COVID-19 patients in the US, Spain and South Korea. These results suggest that C-19 should not be used to aid decision making during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings highlight the importance of performing external validation across a range of settings, especially when a prediction model is being extrapolated to a different population. In the field of prediction, extensive validation is required to create appropriate trust in a model.
ABSTRACT
IntroductionAngiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) could influence infection risk of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Observational studies to date lack pre-specification, transparency, rigorous ascertainment adjustment and international generalizability, with contradictory results. MethodsUsing electronic health records from Spain (SIDIAP) and the United States (Columbia University Irving Medical Center and Department of Veterans Affairs), we conducted a systematic cohort study with prevalent ACE, ARB, calcium channel blocker (CCB) and thiazide diuretic (THZ) users to determine relative risk of COVID-19 diagnosis and related hospitalization outcomes. The study addressed confounding through large-scale propensity score adjustment and negative control experiments. ResultsFollowing over 1.1 million antihypertensive users identified between November 2019 and January 2020, we observed no significant difference in relative COVID-19 diagnosis risk comparing ACE/ARB vs CCB/THZ monotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% CI 0.84 - 1.14), nor any difference for mono/combination use (1.01; 0.90 - 1.15). ACE alone and ARB alone similarly showed no relative risk difference when compared to CCB/THZ monotherapy or mono/combination use. Directly comparing ACE vs. ARB demonstrated a moderately lower risk with ACE, non-significant for monotherapy (0.85; 0.69 - 1.05) and marginally significant for mono/combination users (0.88; 0.79 - 0.99). We observed, however, no significant difference between drug-classes for COVID-19 hospitalization or pneumonia risk across all comparisons. ConclusionThere is no clinically significant increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis or hospitalization with ACE or ARB use. Users should not discontinue or change their treatment to avoid COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo develop and externally validate COVID-19 Estimated Risk (COVER) scores that quantify a patients risk of hospital admission (COVER-H), requiring intensive services (COVER-I), or fatality (COVER-F) in the 30-days following COVID-19 diagnosis. MethodsWe analyzed a federated network of electronic medical records and administrative claims data from 14 data sources and 6 countries. We developed and validated 3 scores using 6,869,127 patients with a general practice, emergency room, or outpatient visit with diagnosed influenza or flu-like symptoms any time prior to 2020. The scores were validated on patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 diagnosis across five databases from South Korea, Spain and the United States. Outcomes included i) hospitalization with pneumonia, ii) hospitalization with pneumonia requiring intensive services or death iii) death in the 30 days after index date. ResultsOverall, 44,507 COVID-19 patients were included for model validation. We identified 7 predictors (history of cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, kidney disease) which combined with age and sex discriminated which patients would experience any of our three outcomes. The models achieved high performance in influenza. When transported to COVID-19 cohorts, the AUC ranges were, COVER-H: 0.69-0.81, COVER-I: 0.73-0.91, and COVER-F: 0.72-0.90. Calibration was overall acceptable. ConclusionsA 9-predictor model performs well for COVID-19 patients for predicting hospitalization, intensive services and fatality. The models could aid in providing reassurance for low risk patients and shield high risk patients from COVID-19 during de-confinement to reduce the virus impact on morbidity and mortality.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundTo date, characterisation studies of COVID-19 have focussed on hospitalised or intensive care patients. We report for the first time on the natural history of COVID-19 disease from first diagnosis, including both outpatient and hospital care. MethodsData was obtained from SIDIAP, a primary care records database covering >6 million people (>80% of the population of Catalonia), linked to COVID-19 RT-PCR tests, hospital emergency and inpatient, and mortality registers. All participants >=15 years, diagnosed with COVID-19 in outpatient between 15th March and 24th April 2020 (10th April for outcome studies) were included. Baseline characteristics, testing, and 30-day outcomes (hospitalisation for COVID-19 and all-cause fatality) were analysed. ResultsA total of 121,263 and 95,467 COVID-19 patients were identified for characterisation and outcome studies, respectively. Women (57.8%) and age 45-54 (20.2%) were predominant. 44,709 were tested, with 32,976 (73.8%) PCR+. From 95,467 cases, a 14.6% [14.4-14.9] were hospitalised in the month after diagnosis, with male predominance (19.2% vs 11.3%), peaking at age 75-84. Overall 30-day fatality was 4.0% [95%CI 3.9%-4.2%], higher in men (4.8%) than women (3.4%), increasing with age, and highest in those residing in nursing homes (25.3% [24.2% to 26.4%]). ConclusionsCOVID-19 is seen in all age-sex strata, but severe forms of disease cluster in older men and nursing home residents. Although initially managed in primary care, 15% of cases require hospitalization within a month, with overall fatality of 4%.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundIn this study we phenotyped individuals hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in depth, summarising entire medical histories, including medications, as captured in routinely collected data drawn from databases across three continents. We then compared individuals hospitalised with COVID-19 to those previously hospitalised with influenza. MethodsWe report demographics, previously recorded conditions and medication use of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the US (Columbia University Irving Medical Center [CUIMC], Premier Healthcare Database [PHD], UCHealth System Health Data Compass Database [UC HDC], and the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA OMOP]), in South Korea (Health Insurance Review & Assessment [HIRA]), and Spain (The Information System for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP] and HM Hospitales [HM]). These patients were then compared with patients hospitalised with influenza in 2014-19. Results34,128 (US: 8,362, South Korea: 7,341, Spain: 18,425) individuals hospitalised with COVID-19 were included. Between 4,811 (HM) and 11,643 (CUIMC) unique aggregate characteristics were extracted per patient, with all summarised in an accompanying interactive website (http://evidence.ohdsi.org/Covid19CharacterizationHospitalization/). Patients were majority male in the US (CUIMC: 52%, PHD: 52%, UC HDC: 54%, VA OMOP: 94%,) and Spain (SIDIAP: 54%, HM: 60%), but were predominantly female in South Korea (HIRA: 60%). Age profiles varied across data sources. Prevalence of asthma ranged from 4% to 15%, diabetes from 13% to 43%, and hypertensive disorder from 24% to 70% across data sources. Between 14% and 33% were taking drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin system in the 30 days prior to hospitalisation. Compared to 81,596 individuals hospitalised with influenza in 2014-19, patients admitted with COVID-19 were more typically male, younger, and healthier, with fewer comorbidities and lower medication use. ConclusionsWe provide a detailed characterisation of patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Protecting groups known to be vulnerable to influenza is a useful starting point to minimize the number of hospital admissions needed for COVID-19. However, such strategies will also likely need to be broadened so as to reflect the particular characteristics of individuals hospitalised with COVID-19.