we hypothesize that increased biological age, rather than chronological age, may be driving disease-related trends in COVID-19 severity with age.
Biological aging, as captured by PhenoAge, is a better predictor of COVID-19 severity than chronological age
附
1)An odds ratio (OR) is a measure of association between an exposure and an outcome.
-
OR=1 Exposure does not affect odds of outcome
-
OR>1 Exposure associated with higher odds of outcome
-
OR<1 Exposure associated with lower odds of outcome
2) CI (Confidence interval)置信区间
3)chronological age vs biological age
When asked how old you are, you likely answer based on the number of years that have passed since you were born. That would be your chronological age.
But maybe your doctor says you have the physical conditioning of a 21-year-old. This would be considered your biological age, regardless of how many years ago you were born.
4)PPV(Positive predictive value)=True positive/(True positive+false positive)
Positive predictive is the probability that following a positive test result, that individual will truly have that specific disease
NPV（Negative predictive value）=True negative/(True negative+false nagetive)
Negative predictive value is the probability that following a negative test result, that individual will truly not have that specific disease.
参考： https://geekymedics.com/sensitivity-specificity-ppv-and-npv/
5)The UK Biobank Resource
A1.1 UK Biobank has recruited 500,000 men and women from the UK population who were aged 40- 69 at the time of their baseline assessment visit during 2007-2010. This assessment involved an extensive range of questions and measurements, as well as collection of biological samples that allow many different types of assay to be conducted.
A1.2 With the consent of each participant, these data are being linked to their health-related records (in such a way that the participant’s confidentiality is preserved) so that the baseline information can be used in conjunction with the information about health conditions that develop.
A1.3 The rationale for recruitment of a cohort of such large size was to allow reliable quantification of the relevance of a large number of risk factors (e.g. lifestyle, environment and genes), both separately and in combination, to a wide range of diseases developing during follow-up.