Search

Backgrounds Validated tools for predicting individual in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 are lacking. We aimed to develop and to validate a simple clinical prediction rule for early identification of in-hospital mortality of patients with COVID-19. Methods and findings We enrolled 2191 consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from three Italian dedicated units (derivation cohort: 1810 consecutive patients from Bergamo and Pavia units; validation cohort: 381 consecutive patients from Rome unit). The outcome was in-hospital mortality. Fine and Gray competing risks multivariate model (with discharge as a competing event) was used to develop a prediction rule for in-hospital mortality. Discrimination and calibration were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and by Brier score in both the derivation and validation cohorts. Seven variables were independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality: age (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.07–1.09), male sex (HR 1.62, 95%CI 1.30–2.00), duration of symptoms before hospital admission <10 days (HR 1.72, 95%CI 1.39–2.12), diabetes (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02–1.45), coronary heart disease (HR 1.40 95% CI 1.09–1.80), chronic liver disease (HR 1.78, 95%CI 1.16–2.72), and lactate dehydrogenase levels at admission (HR 1.0003, 95%CI 1.0002–1.0005). The AUC was 0.822 (95%CI 0.722–0.922) in the derivation cohort and 0.820 (95%CI 0.724–0.920) in the validation cohort with good calibration. The prediction rule is freely available as a web-app (COVID-CALC: https://sites.google.com/community. unipa.it/covid-19riskpredictions/c19-rp). Conclusions A validated simple clinical prediction rule can promptly and accurately assess the risk for in-hospital mortality, improving triage and the management of patients with COVID-19.

In anni recenti, numerose occasioni di dibattito, e talvolta di conflitto, fra occidente e mondo islamico, sono nate intorno alla questione della visibilità, cioè di che cosa si debba vedere e di che cosa non si debba vedere: il velo e i simboli religiosi nello spazio pubblico, le vignette e i film satirici contro l’Islam, le immagini di guerra e tortura in Iraq, la distruzione di opere d’arte antica in Siria e Iraq, i filmati di esecuzioni e decapitazioni da parte di Da‘esh, le proteste di massa durante le «primavere arabe» e in Turchia, e molti altri. Perché tanta tensione intorno a dove vanno e a dove non vanno gli sguardi? Perché tali scontri riguardo a che cosa è rappresentato e a che cosa non deve esserlo? Il saggio affronta queste domande con riferimento alla storia della rappresentazione delle immagini e del suo divieto fra occidente e mondo islamico. A partire dal lavoro di M.-J. Mondzain e J. Crary, si considera inoltre come l'epoca moderna abbia per certi versi ricevuto e trasformato profondamente la logica di quelle tradizioni rappresentative, ponendo una nuova sfida alla definizione di regimi di visibilità condivisi nel pluralismo delle società contemporanee., In recent years, debates and conflicts between the West and the Islamic world have often emerged from the problem of visibility, i.e. what could and should be seen: the veil and other religious symbols in public spaces, the satyre against Islam, images of war and torture from Iraq, the destruction of ancient sites in Syria, the violent Da'esh propaganda, the mass protests during the Arab Spring and in Turkey, etc. Why so much tension about the direction of people's gaze? Why such violent clashes about what should or should not be represented? The essay faces these questions by looking at the history of images and representations between Western and Islamic world. With reference to the work of M.-J. Mondzain and J. Crary, the study focuses the dramatic modifications that modernity determined inside those traditions of representation, posing new challenges to the definition of shared regimes of visibility in pluralistic contemporary societies.