Search

Abstract Background The associations between deprivation and illness trajectory after hospitalisation for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) are uncertain. Methods A prospective, multicentre cohort study was conducted on post-COVID-19 patients, enrolled either in-hospital or shortly post-discharge. Two evaluations were carried out: an initial assessment and a follow-up at 28–60 days post-discharge. The study encompassed research blood tests, patient-reported outcome measures, and multisystem imaging (including chest computed tomography (CT) with pulmonary and coronary angiography, cardiovascular and renal magnetic resonance imaging). Primary and secondary outcomes were analysed in relation to socioeconomic status, using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). The EQ-5D-5L, Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) for Anxiety and Depression, and the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) were used to assess health status. Results Of the 252 enrolled patients (mean age 55.0 ± 12.0 years; 40% female; 23% with diabetes), deprivation status was linked with increased BMI and diabetes prevalence. 186 (74%) returned for the follow-up. Within this group, findings indicated associations between deprivation and lung abnormalities (p = 0.0085), coronary artery disease (p = 0.0128), and renal inflammation (p = 0.0421). Furthermore, patients with higher deprivation exhibited worse scores in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, p = 0.0084), illness perception (BIPQ, p = 0.0004), anxiety and depression levels (PHQ-4, p = 0.0038), and diminished physical activity (DASI, p = 0.002). At the 3-month mark, those with greater deprivation showed a higher frequency of referrals to secondary care due to ongoing COVID-19 symptoms (p = 0.0438). However, clinical outcomes were not influenced by deprivation. Conclusions In a post-hospital COVID-19 population, socioeconomic deprivation was associated with impaired health status and secondary care episodes. Deprivation influences illness trajectory after COVID-19.

QRS detection within an electrocardiogram (ECG) is the basis of virtually any further processing and any error caused by this detection will propagate to further processing stages. However, standard benchmarking procedures of QRS detectors are seriously flawed because they report almost always close to 100% accuracy for any QRS detection algorithm. This is due to the use of large temporal error margins and noise-free ECG databases which grossly overestimate their performance. The use of a large fixed error margin masks temporal jitter between detection and ground truth measurements. Here, we present a new performance measure (JF) which combines temporal jitter with the F-score, and also an ECG database with decreasing levels of signal to noise ratios based on noise generated from different tasks. Our new performance measure JF fully encompasses all the types of errors that can occur, equally weights them and provides a percentage value which allows direct comparison between QRS detection algorithms. In combination with the new noisy ECG database, the JF performance measure now varies between 50% and 100% for different detectors and signal to noise conditions thereby making it possible to find the best detector for an application.