One-year all-cause mortality and comorbidity predictors in 14975 adults with PCR-confirmed COVID-19: a Turkish cohort study


Abstract

Background. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), produces outcomes from mild illness to death. Although in-hospital prognostic factors have been widely reported, long-term mortality data are scarce, particularly from middle-income countries with relatively young populations. We therefore quantified one-year all-cause mortality and identified independent predictors in a large Turkish cohort. This information is critical for guiding follow-up strategies and allocating resources as the pandemic transitions to an endemic phase, and for developing prevention programs targeting high-risk groups.

Methods. All adults aged 18 years or older with polymerase chain reaction–confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to Haydarpaşa Numune Training and Research Hospital between 1 March 2020 and 31 January 2021 were retrospectively included. Demographics, smoking status, and comorbidities coded by the ICD-10 were extracted from electronic records. Missing smoking data (3.75 %) were imputed by multiple imputation with chained equations. One-year survival status obtained from the death registry. Risk factors were examined by Cox proportional hazards models after confirming model assumptions.

Results. Among 14,975 patients (median age 40 years, interquartile range 28.5–52.2; 50.8 % male), 357 deaths occurred within 365 days, giving one-year mortality of 2.4 %. Non-survivors were older (71.8 vs 39.5 years), more often male (63 % vs 50.5 %), and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and cancer. In multivariable analysis each additional year of age increased risk by 10 % (HR: 1.10). Other independent predictors were male sex (HR: 1.91), diabetes mellitus (HR: 1.28), ischemic heart disease (HR: 1.73), heart failure (HR: 1.44), chronic kidney disease (HR: 1.46), and cancer (HR: 2.06). Smoking was inversely associated with mortality (HR: 0.71) after inverse-probability weighting. Model discrimination was excellent (concordance index 0.89) and only cancer showed minor time-dependency early in follow-up. Bootstrap optimism correction confirmed robustness.

Discussion. One-year mortality after COVID-19 in this relatively young Turkish population was low yet clinically meaningful. Persistent excess risk among older adults, men, and patients with cancer or major cardiometabolic disease underscores the need for structured post-acute surveillance, prioritised vaccination boosters, and aggressive management of underlying conditions. The inverse association with current smoking is probably due to residual or unmeasured confounding and should not influence practice. These findings refine long-term risk stratification and can guide resource allocation as COVID-19 becomes an endemic threat; further rigorous external validation that incorporates vaccination status and viral variants is warranted.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].