CO@h项目比较效果研究——死亡率数据集

数据集获取（Figshare）

• 源站标题：Comparative effectiveness of CO@h—mortality.
• DOI：10.1371/journal.pone.0310822.t003
• 发布日期：2024-11-15
• 文件数：1 个
• 文件总体积：9.73 KB
• 源站页面：https://plos.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Comparative_effectiveness_of_CO_h_mortality_/27767739

命令行下载

curl -L -o "Table 3.xls" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/50535624"

文件清单

• Table 3.xls（9.73 KB）

文件总体积 9.73 KB（源站 API 实测）。

数据加载示例（图像类）

from PIL import Image
import glob, os

files = (glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.png"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.jpg"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.tif"), recursive=True))
print("图像文件数:", len(files))
img = Image.open(files[0]); print("尺寸/模式:", img.size, img.mode)

# torchvision Dataset 方式:
# from torchvision import datasets
# ds = datasets.ImageFolder(path)  # 要求 子目录=类别

目录组织与标注格式以源站说明和下载后实际文件为准。

数据说明

Introduction
The pandemic saw widespread use of home pulse oximeters to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 to support early detection of low oxygen saturation levels and appropriate care. Rapid implementation made conventional evaluation challenging, highlighting the need for rigorous non-randomised methods to support decision-making about future use of these technologies. We used routine data to explore the benefits of pulse oximetry in Greater Manchester, under the ‘COVID-19 oximetry at home’ (CO@h) programme.
Methods
We used data from the Greater Manchester Secure Data Environment and defined study parameters using a ‘target trial’ model to compare patients receiving pulse oximetry under the CO@h programme, with matched controls using various comparator groups. Primary outcomes were unplanned hospitalisation and all-cause mortality. This study is based on data from the Greater Manchester Care Record (GMCR), using anonymised, routinely collected data provided in a de-identified format for research. Informed written consent is needed for primary care patient data to be collected for service improvement and research, before data extraction to the GMCR. The study was approved under protocol GMCR RQ-048, on 12/05/2022. As indicated by the University of Manchester ethics decision tool, formal ethical approval was not required for this study.
Results
The adjusted odds ratios for an unplanned hospitalisation were higher among patients receiving pulse oximetry: OR 1.86 (95% CI 1.54–2.25) at 28 days, 1.5 (95% CI 1.3–1.74) at 90 days and 1.63 (95% CI 1.44–1.83) at 1 year. Overall odds of mortality were lower among patients receiving pulse oximetry: adjusted ORs of 0.5 (95% CI 0.25–0.98) at 28 days, 0.5 (95% CI 0.32–0.78) at 90 days and 0.58 (95% CI 0.44–0.76) at 1 year. The results were robust to different comparison groups.
Conclusion
Use of pulse oximetry at home under the CO@h programme, through the resulting prioritisation for appropriate care, was associated with a higher frequency of unplanned admissions and a reduction in the risk of mortality up to 1 year later. Therefore, it is likely effective for early detection of clinical deterioration and timely intervention

许可

CC BY 4.0

引用

学术使用请引用 DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0310822.t003（source: https://plos.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Comparative_effectiveness_of_CO_h_mortality_/27767739）。