Cargando…

Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO

Characteristics and research collaboration of registered systematic reviews (SRs) on treatment modalities for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. This study analysed research collaboration, interventions and outcome measures in registered SRs on COVID-19 treatments and pointed out th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Ruinian, Gao, Ya, Xie, Dairong, Lian, Rongna, Tian, Jinhui
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34130770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268821001321
_version_ 1783720128990412800
author Zhang, Ruinian
Gao, Ya
Xie, Dairong
Lian, Rongna
Tian, Jinhui
author_facet Zhang, Ruinian
Gao, Ya
Xie, Dairong
Lian, Rongna
Tian, Jinhui
author_sort Zhang, Ruinian
collection PubMed
description Characteristics and research collaboration of registered systematic reviews (SRs) on treatment modalities for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. This study analysed research collaboration, interventions and outcome measures in registered SRs on COVID-19 treatments and pointed out the relevant problems. PROSPERO (international prospective register of systematic reviews) was searched for SRs on COVID-19 treatments as of 2 June 2020. Excel 2016 was used for descriptive analyses of the extracted data. VOSviewer 1.6.14 software was used to generate network maps for collaborations between countries and institutions. A total of 189 SRs were included, which were registered by 301 institutions from 39 countries. China (69, 36.50%) exhibited the highest output. Cooperation between countries was not close enough. As an institution, the Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (7, 3.70%) had the highest output. There was close cooperation between institutions. Interventions included antiviral therapy (81, 42.86%), respiratory support (16, 8.47%), circulatory support (11, 5.82%), plasma therapy for convalescent patients (11, 5.82%), immunotherapy (9, 4.76%), TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) treatment (9, 4.76%), rehabilitation treatment (5, 2.65%), anti-inflammatory treatment (16, 8.47%) and other treatments (31, 16.40%). Concerning antiviral therapy (81, 42.86%), the most commonly used antiviral agents were chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (26, 13.76%), followed by remdesivir (12, 6.35%), lobinavir/ritonavir (11, 5.82%), favipiravir (5, 2.65%), ribavirin (5, 2.65%), interferon (5, 2.65%), abiron (4, 2.12%) and abidor (4, 2.12%). The most frequently used primary and secondary outcomes were the mortality rate (92, 48.68%) and hospital stay length (48, 25.40%), respectively. The expression of the outcomes was not standardised. Many COVID-19 SRs on treatment modalities have been registered, with a low completion rate. Although there was some collaboration between countries and institutions in the currently registered SRs on treatment modalities for COVID-19 on PROSPERO, cooperation between countries should be further enhanced. More attention should be directed towards identifying deficiencies of outcome measures, and the standardisation of results should be maximised.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8267341
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82673412021-07-09 Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO Zhang, Ruinian Gao, Ya Xie, Dairong Lian, Rongna Tian, Jinhui Epidemiol Infect Original Paper Characteristics and research collaboration of registered systematic reviews (SRs) on treatment modalities for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. This study analysed research collaboration, interventions and outcome measures in registered SRs on COVID-19 treatments and pointed out the relevant problems. PROSPERO (international prospective register of systematic reviews) was searched for SRs on COVID-19 treatments as of 2 June 2020. Excel 2016 was used for descriptive analyses of the extracted data. VOSviewer 1.6.14 software was used to generate network maps for collaborations between countries and institutions. A total of 189 SRs were included, which were registered by 301 institutions from 39 countries. China (69, 36.50%) exhibited the highest output. Cooperation between countries was not close enough. As an institution, the Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (7, 3.70%) had the highest output. There was close cooperation between institutions. Interventions included antiviral therapy (81, 42.86%), respiratory support (16, 8.47%), circulatory support (11, 5.82%), plasma therapy for convalescent patients (11, 5.82%), immunotherapy (9, 4.76%), TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) treatment (9, 4.76%), rehabilitation treatment (5, 2.65%), anti-inflammatory treatment (16, 8.47%) and other treatments (31, 16.40%). Concerning antiviral therapy (81, 42.86%), the most commonly used antiviral agents were chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (26, 13.76%), followed by remdesivir (12, 6.35%), lobinavir/ritonavir (11, 5.82%), favipiravir (5, 2.65%), ribavirin (5, 2.65%), interferon (5, 2.65%), abiron (4, 2.12%) and abidor (4, 2.12%). The most frequently used primary and secondary outcomes were the mortality rate (92, 48.68%) and hospital stay length (48, 25.40%), respectively. The expression of the outcomes was not standardised. Many COVID-19 SRs on treatment modalities have been registered, with a low completion rate. Although there was some collaboration between countries and institutions in the currently registered SRs on treatment modalities for COVID-19 on PROSPERO, cooperation between countries should be further enhanced. More attention should be directed towards identifying deficiencies of outcome measures, and the standardisation of results should be maximised. Cambridge University Press 2021-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8267341/ /pubmed/34130770 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268821001321 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Zhang, Ruinian
Gao, Ya
Xie, Dairong
Lian, Rongna
Tian, Jinhui
Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title_full Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title_fullStr Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title_full_unstemmed Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title_short Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
title_sort characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for covid-19 registered in prospero
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34130770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268821001321
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangruinian characteristicsofsystematicreviewsevaluatingtreatmentsforcovid19registeredinprospero
AT gaoya characteristicsofsystematicreviewsevaluatingtreatmentsforcovid19registeredinprospero
AT xiedairong characteristicsofsystematicreviewsevaluatingtreatmentsforcovid19registeredinprospero
AT lianrongna characteristicsofsystematicreviewsevaluatingtreatmentsforcovid19registeredinprospero
AT tianjinhui characteristicsofsystematicreviewsevaluatingtreatmentsforcovid19registeredinprospero