ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Machine learning-based risk prediction of outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Australia: the AUS-COVID Score.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to develop a highly interpretable and effective, machine learning (ML)-based risk prediction algorithm to predict in-hospital mortality, intubation, and adverse cardiovascular events in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Australia (AUS-COVID Score). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective study across 21 hospitals included 1714 consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 in their index hospitalization with COVID-19. The dataset was separated into training (80%) and test sets (20%). Eight supervised ML methods were used: least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), ridge, elastic net (EN), decision tree, support vector machine, random forest, AdaBoost, and gradient boosting. A feature selection method was used to establish informative variables, which were considered in groups of 5/10/15/20/all. The final model was selected by balancing the optimal area under the curve (AUC) score with interpretability, through the number of included variables. The coefficients of the final models were used to build the AUS-COVID Score. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Among the patients, 181 (10.6%) died in-hospital, 148 (8.6%) required intubation, and 90 (5.3%) had adverse cardiovascular events. The LASSO model performed best for predicting in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.85) using 5 variables: age, respiratory rate, COVID-19 features on chest X-ray, troponin elevation, and COVID-19 vaccination (≥1 dose). The EN model performed best for predicting intubation (AUC 0.75) and adverse cardiovascular events (AUC 0.64), each with 5 variables. A user-friendly web-based application was built for clinician use at the bedside.
conclusionThe AUS-COVID Score is an accurate and practical, ML-based risk score to predict in-hospital mortality, intubation, and adverse cardiovascular events in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.