Cargando…
Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review
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 evaluate...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8130955/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34003850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251250 |
_version_ | 1783694617738215424 |
---|---|
author | Manoharan, Lakshmi Cattrall, Jonathan W. S. Harris, Carlyn Newell, Katherine Thomson, Blake Pritchard, Mark G. Bannister, Peter G. Sigfrid, Louise Solomon, Tom Horby, Peter W. Carson, Gail Olliaro, Piero |
author_facet | Manoharan, Lakshmi Cattrall, Jonathan W. S. Harris, Carlyn Newell, Katherine Thomson, Blake Pritchard, Mark G. Bannister, Peter G. Sigfrid, Louise Solomon, Tom Horby, Peter W. Carson, Gail Olliaro, Piero |
author_sort | Manoharan, Lakshmi |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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 1(st) 2020 to April 28(th) 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 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8130955 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81309552021-05-27 Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review Manoharan, Lakshmi Cattrall, Jonathan W. S. Harris, Carlyn Newell, Katherine Thomson, Blake Pritchard, Mark G. Bannister, Peter G. Sigfrid, Louise Solomon, Tom Horby, Peter W. Carson, Gail Olliaro, Piero PLoS One Research Article 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 1(st) 2020 to April 28(th) 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 Public Library of Science 2021-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8130955/ /pubmed/34003850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251250 Text en © 2021 Manoharan et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Manoharan, Lakshmi Cattrall, Jonathan W. S. Harris, Carlyn Newell, Katherine Thomson, Blake Pritchard, Mark G. Bannister, Peter G. Sigfrid, Louise Solomon, Tom Horby, Peter W. Carson, Gail Olliaro, Piero Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title | Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title_full | Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title_short | Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review |
title_sort | evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the covid-19 pandemic: a systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8130955/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34003850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251250 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT manoharanlakshmi evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT cattralljonathanws evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT harriscarlyn evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT newellkatherine evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT thomsonblake evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT pritchardmarkg evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT bannisterpeterg evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT sigfridlouise evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT solomontom evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT horbypeterw evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT carsongail evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview AT olliaropiero evaluatingclinicalcharacteristicsstudiesproducedearlyinthecovid19pandemicasystematicreview |