Objective To review and appraise the validity and usefulness of published and preprint reports of prediction models for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in patients with suspected infection, for prognosis of patients with covid-19, and for detecting people in the general population at increased risk of covid-19 infection or being admitted to hospital with the disease. Design Living systematic review and critical appraisal by the COVID-PRECISE (Precise Risk Estimation to optimise covid-19 Care for Infected or Suspected patients in diverse sEttings) group. Data sources PubMed and Embase through Ovid, up to 1 July 2020, supplemented with arXiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv up to 5 May 2020. Study selection Studies that developed or validated a multivariable covid-19 related prediction model. Data extraction At least two authors independently extracted data using the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist; risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool). Results 37 421 titles were screened, and 169 studies describing 232 prediction models were included. The review identified seven models for identifying people at risk in the general population; 118 diagnostic models for detecting covid-19 (75 were based on medical imaging, 10 to diagnose disease severity); and 107 prognostic models for predicting mortality risk, progression to severe disease, intensive care unit admission, ventilation, intubation, or length of hospital stay. The most frequent types of predictors included in the covid-19 prediction models are vital signs, age, comorbidities, and image features. Flu-like symptoms are frequently predictive in diagnostic models, while sex, C reactive protein, and lymphocyte counts are frequent prognostic factors. Reported C index estimates from the strongest form of validation available per model ranged from 0.71 to 0.99 in prediction models for the general population, from 0.65 to more than 0.99 in diagnostic models, and from 0.54 to 0.99 in prognostic models. All models were rated at high or unclear risk of bias, mostly because of non-representative selection of control patients, exclusion of patients who had not experienced the event of interest by the end of the study, high risk of model overfitting, and unclear reporting. Many models did not include a description of the target population (n=27, 12%) or care setting (n=75, 32%), and only 11 (5%) were externally validated by a calibration plot. The Jehi diagnostic model and the 4C mortality score were identified as promising models. Conclusion Prediction models for covid-19 are quickly entering the academic literature to support medical decision making at a time when they are urgently needed. This review indicates that almost all pubished prediction models are poorly reported, and at high risk of bias such that their reported predictive performance is probably optimistic. However, we have identified two (one diagnostic and one prognostic) promising models that should soon be validated in multiple cohorts, preferably through collaborative efforts and data sharing to also allow an investigation of the stability and heterogeneity in their performance across populations and settings. Details on all reviewed models are publicly available at https://www.covprecise.org/. Methodological guidance as provided in this paper should be followed because unreliable predictions could cause more harm than benefit in guiding clinical decisions. Finally, prediction model authors should adhere to the TRIPOD (transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis) reporting guideline. Systematic review registration Protocol https://osf.io/ehc47/, registration https://osf.io/wy245. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 3 of the original article published on 7 April 2020 (BMJ 2020;369:m1328). Previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1328/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/369/bmj.m1328.full.pdf

Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal

Mini Mental State

Child psychiatrists, pediatricians, and other child clinicians need to have a solid understanding of child language development. There are at least four important reasons that make this necessary. First, slowing, arrest, and deviation of language development are highly associated with, and complicate the course of, child psychopathology. Second, language competence plays a crucial role in emotional and mood regulation, evaluation, and therapy. Third, language deficits are the most frequent underpinning of the learning disorders, ubiquitous in our clinical populations. Fourth, clinicians should not confuse the rich linguistic and dialectal diversity of our clinical populations with abnormalities in child language development. The challenge for the clinician becomes, then, how to get immersed in the captivating field of child language acquisition without getting overwhelmed by its conceptual and empirical complexity. In the past 50 years and since the seminal works of Roger Brown, Jerome Bruner, and Catherine Snow, child language researchers (often known as developmental psycholinguists) have produced a remarkable body of knowledge. Linguists such as Chomsky and philosophers such as Grice have strongly influenced the science of child language. One of the major tenets of Chomskian linguistics (known as generative grammar) is that children’s capacity to acquire language is “hardwired” with “universal grammar”—an innate language acquisition device (LAD), a language “instinct”—at its core. This view is in part supported by the assertion that the linguistic input that children receive is relatively dismal and of poor quality relative to the high quantity and quality of output that they manage to produce after age 2 and that only an advanced, innate capacity to decode and organize linguistic input can enable them to “get from here (prelinguistic infant) to there (linguistic child).” In “Constructing a Language,” Tomasello presents a contrasting theory of how the child acquires language: It is not a universal grammar that allows for language development. Rather, human cognition universals of communicative needs and vocal-auditory processing result in some language universals, such as nouns and verbs as expressions of reference and predication (p. 19). The author proposes that two sets of cognitive skills resulting from biological/phylogenetic adaptations are fundamental to the ontogenetic origins of language. These sets of inherited cognitive skills are intentionreading on the one hand and pattern-finding, on the other. Intention-reading skills encompass the prelinguistic infant’s capacities to share attention to outside events with other persons, establishing joint attentional frames, to understand other people’s communicative intentions, and to imitate the adult’s communicative intentions (an intersubjective form of imitation that requires symbolic understanding and perspective-taking). Pattern-finding skills include the ability of infants as young as 7 months old to analyze concepts and percepts (most relevant here, auditory or speech percepts) and create concrete or abstract categories that contain analogous items. Tomasello, a most prominent developmental scientist with research foci on child language acquisition and on social cognition and social learning in children and primates, succinctly and clearly introduces the major points of his theory and his views on the origins of language in the initial chapters. In subsequent chapters, he delves into the details by covering most language acquisition domains, namely, word (lexical) learning, syntax, and morphology and conversation, narrative, and extended discourse. Although one of the remaining domains (pragmatics) is at the core of his theory and permeates the text throughout, the relative paucity of passages explicitly devoted to discussing acquisition and proBOOK REVIEWS

Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language

Ethnologue: Languages of the World

This paper proposes a series of techniques for extracting English verb--particle constructions from raw text corpora. We initially propose three basic methods, based on tagger output, chunker output and a chunk grammar, respectively, with the chunk grammar method optionally combining with an attachment resolution module to determine the syntactic structure of verb--preposition pairs in ambiguous constructs. We then combine the three methods together into a single classifier, and add in a number of extra lexical and frequentistic features, producing a final F-score of 0.865 over the WSJ.

Extracting the unextractable: a case study on verb-particles

This paper presents the Multiword Expression Toolkit (mwetoolkit), an environment for type and language-independent MWE identification from corpora. The mwetoolkit provides a targeted list of MWE candidates, extracted and filtered according to a number of user-defined criteria and a set of standard statistical association measures. For generating corpus counts, the toolkit provides both a corpus indexation facility and a tool for integration with web search engines, while for evaluation, it provides validation and annotation facilities. The mwetoolkit also allows easy integration with a machine learning tool for the creation and application of supervised MWE extraction models if annotated data is available. In our experiment, the mwetoolkit was tested and evaluated in the context of MWE extraction in the biomedical domain. Our preliminary results show that the toolkit performs better than other approaches, especially concerning recall. Moreover, this first version can also be extended in several ways in order to improve the quality of the results.

/pdf/mwetoolkit-a-framework-for-multiword-expression-45ol2n57xm.pdf

mwetoolkit: a Framework for Multiword Expression Identification

This paper discusses the approach to multiword expressions being adopted in the LinGO English Resource Grammar (http://lingo.stanford.edu), a broad-scale bidirectional grammar of English in the HPSG framework. We discuss how the lexicon of multiword expressions is encoded in a database and describe the implications for building a reusable lexical resource.

/pdf/multiword-expressions-linguistic-precision-and-reusability-12pnr586pz.pdf

Multiword expressions: linguistic precision and reusability.

This paper focuses on the evaluation of methods for the automatic acquisition of Multiword Expressions (MWEs) for robust grammar engineering. First we investigate the hypothesis that MWEs can be detected by the distinct statistical properties of their component words, regardless of their type, comparing 3 statistical measures: mutual information (MI), � 2 and permutation entropy (PE). Our overall conclusion is that at least two measures, MI and PE, seem to differentiate MWEs from non-MWEs. We then investigate the influence of the size and quality of different corpora, using the BNC and the Web search engines Google and Yahoo. We conclude that, in terms of language usage, web generated corpora are fairly similar to more carefully built corpora, like the BNC, indicating that the lack of control and balance of these corpora are probably compensated by their size. Finally, we show a qualitative evaluation of the results of automatically adding extracted MWEs to existing linguistic resources. We argue that such a process improves qualitatively, if a more compositional approach to grammar/lexicon automated extension is adopted.

Aline Villavicencio

Papers

Extracting the unextractable: a case study on verb-particles

mwetoolkit: a Framework for Multiword Expression Identification

Multiword expressions: linguistic precision and reusability.

Validation and Evaluation of Automatically Acquired Multiword Expressions for Grammar Engineering

Editorial: Introduction to the special issue on multiword expressions: Having a crack at a hard nut