RESUMO
BackgroundIt is not clear whether previous thyroid diseases influence the course and outcomes of COVID-19. The study aims to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with and without hypothyroidism. MethodsThe study is a part of a multicentric cohort of patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis, including data collected from 37 hospitals. Matching for age, sex, number of comorbidities and hospital was performed to select the patients without hypothyroidism for the paired analysis. ResultsFrom 7,762 COVID-19 patients, 526 had previously diagnosed hypothyroidism (50%) and 526 were selected as matched controls. The median age was 70 (interquartile range 59.0-80.0) years-old and 68.3% were females. The prevalence of underlying comorbidities were similar between groups, except for coronary and chronic kidney diseases, that had a higher prevalence in the hypothyroidism group (9.7% vs. 5.7%, p=0.015 and 9.9% vs. 4.8%, p=0.001, respectively). At hospital presentation, patients with hypothyroidism had a lower frequency of respiratory rate > 24 breaths per minute (36.1% vs 42.0%; p=0.050) and need of mechanical ventilation (4.0% vs 7.4%; p=0.016). D-dimer levels were slightly lower in hypothyroid patients (2.3 times higher than the reference value vs 2.9 times higher; p=0.037). In-hospital management was similar between groups, but hospital length-of-stay (8 vs 9 days; p=0.029) and mechanical ventilation requirement (25.4% vs. 33.1%; p=0.006) were lower for patients with hypothyroidism. There was a trend of lower in-hospital mortality in patients with hypothyroidism (22.1% vs. 27.0%; p=0.062). ConclusionIn this large Brazilian COVID-19 Registry, patients with hypothyroidism had a lower requirement of mechanical ventilation, and showed a trend of lower in-hospital mortality. Therefore, hypothyroidism does not seem to be associated with a worse prognosis, and should not be considered among the comorbidities that indicate a risk factor for COVID-19 severity.
RESUMO
ObjectiveTo provide a thorough comparative study among state-of-the-art machine learning methods and statistical methods for determining in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients using data upon hospital admission; to study the reliability of the predictions of the most effective methods by correlating the probability of the outcome and the accuracy of the methods; to investigate how explainable are the predictions produced by the most effective methods. Materials and MethodsDe-identified data were obtained from COVID-19 positive patients in 36 participating hospitals, from March 1 to September 30, 2020. Demographic, comorbidity, clinical presentation and laboratory data were used as training data to develop COVID-19 mortality prediction models. Multiple machine learning and traditional statistics models were trained on this prediction task using a folded cross-validation procedure, from which we assessed performance and interpretability metrics. ResultsThe Stacking of machine learning models improved over the previous state-of-the-art results by more than 26% in predicting the class of interest (death), achieving 87.1% of AUROC and macro F1 of 73.9%. We also show that some machine learning models can be very interpretable and reliable, yielding more accurate predictions while providing a good explanation for the why. ConclusionThe best results were obtained using the meta-learning ensemble model - Stacking. State-of the art explainability techniques such as SHAP-values can be used to draw useful insights into the patterns learned by machine-learning algorithms. Machine-learning models can be more explainable than traditional statistics models while also yielding highly reliable predictions.
