Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review

Author:

Manoharan LakshmiORCID,Cattrall Jonathan W. S.,Harris Carlyn,Newell Katherine,Thomson Blake,Pritchard Mark G.ORCID,Bannister Peter G.ORCID,Sigfrid Louise,Solomon Tom,Horby Peter W.,Carson Gail,Olliaro Piero

Abstract

Objectives Clinical characterisation studies have been essential in helping inform research, diagnosis and clinical management efforts, particularly early in a pandemic. This systematic review summarises the early literature on clinical characteristics of patients admitted to hospital, and evaluates the quality of evidence produced during the initial stages of the pandemic. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health databases were searched for studies published from January 1st 2020 to April 28th 2020. Studies which reported on at least 100 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 of any age were included. Data on clinical characteristics were independently extracted by two review authors. Study design specific critical appraisal tools were used to evaluate included studies: the Newcastle Ottawa scale for cohort and cross sectional studies, Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series and the Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Results The search yielded 78 studies presenting data on 77,443 people. Most studies (82%) were conducted in China. No studies included patients from low- and middle-income countries. The overall quality of included studies was low to moderate, and the majority of studies did not include a control group. Fever and cough were the most commonly reported symptoms early in the pandemic. Laboratory and imaging findings were diverse with lymphocytopenia and ground glass opacities the most common findings respectively. Clinical data in children and vulnerable populations were limited. Conclusions The early Covid-19 literature had moderate to high risk of bias and presented several methodological issues. Early clinical characterisation studies should aim to include different at-risk populations, including patients in non-hospital settings. Pandemic preparedness requires collection tools to ensure observational studies are methodologically robust and will help produce high-quality data early on in the pandemic to guide clinical practice and public health policy. Review registration Available at https://osf.io/mpafn

Funder

Wellcome Trust

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

National Institute for Health Research

Horizon 2020

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference94 articles.

1. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19-11 March 2020. Geneva, Switzerland; 2020.

2. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China;C Huang;The Lancet.,2020

3. Characteristics of Health Care Personnel with COVID-19—United States, February 12-April 9, 2020;Team CC-R;MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.,2020

4. Association of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) With Myocardial Injury and Mortality;RO Bonow;JAMA Cardiology,2020

5. Neurological associations of COVID-19;MA Ellul;The Lancet Neurology,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3