scholarly journals Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rocío Bravo-Jeria ◽  
María Ximena Rojas Reyes ◽  
Juan Víctor Ariel Franco ◽  
María Paz Acuña ◽  
Luz Ángela Torres López ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo determine the relative impact of the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on outcomes important to patients with COVID 19.DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries, grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine — as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs — versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

scholarly journals Lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisca Verdugo-Paiva ◽  
Ariel Izcovich ◽  
Martín Ragusa ◽  
Gabriel Rada
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of patients with COVID-19.DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question.We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir— as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs — versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating lopinavir/ritonavir in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO RegistrationSubmitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

scholarly journals Vitamin C for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduard Baladia ◽  
Ana Beatriz Pizarro ◽  
Gabriel Rada
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vitamin C ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register

ABSTRACTObjectiveThis living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of vitamin C in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question.We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of vitamin C, as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs, versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating vitamin C in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO RegistrationSubmitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

scholarly journals Mesenchymal stromal cells for COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Rada ◽  
Javiera Corbalán ◽  
Patricio Rojas ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mesenchymal Stromal Cells ◽  
Stromal Cells ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo determine the impact of mesenchymal stromal cells outcomes important to patients with COVID-19.DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question.We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of mesenchymal stromal cells versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating other coronavirus infections, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case we find no direct evidence from randomised trials, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO RegistrationSubmitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

scholarly journals Sexual transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus and its role in the spread of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

Medwave ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (10) ◽  
pp. e8062-e8062
Author(s):  
Giuliano Duarte ◽  
Luis Ortiz-Muñoz ◽  
María Belén Morales ◽  
María Paz Acuña ◽  
Gabriel Rada
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Sexual Transmission ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Meta Analyses

Objective To provide a review of the literature on the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the sexual fluids of patients with COVID-19 and to observe its possible sexual transmission in a timely, rigorous, and continuously updated manner. Data sources We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature, and a centralized repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from the Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customized to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published standard protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomized trials evaluating the sexual transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Randomized trials evaluating the sexual transmission of other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomized studies in COVID-19 will be searched if no direct evidence from randomized trials is found or if the direct evidence provides a low to a very low level of certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit the review if the conclusions change or if there are substantial updates. PROSPERO Registration (CRD42020189368).

Gelatin tannate for acute diarrhoea and gastroenteritis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2018-316385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan D Florez ◽  
Javier M Sierra ◽  
Laura F Niño-Serna
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Acute Diarrhoea ◽  
Stool Frequency ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness and safety of gelatin tannate (GT) for reducing the duration of the acute diarrhoea and gastroenteritis (ADG) in children.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS and grey literature, published from inception to October 2018. No language restrictions.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials in children with ADG, comparing GT with placebo.ResultsOf 797 titles identified, we included three studies (276 children). We performed a random effects model meta-analysis for the main outcome (diarrhoea duration). We did not find significant differences between GT and placebo for diarrhoea duration (mean difference (MD)=−15.85 hours; 95% CI −42.24 to 14.82, I2=92%; three studies), stool frequency at day 2 (MD=0.11 stools/day; 95% CI −0.39 to 0.62: I2=26%; two studies), diarrhoea at day 3 (risk ratio [RR]=0.46; 95% CI 0.06 to 3.47: I2=73%; two studies), vomiting (RR=1.31; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.80: I2=0%; two studies) or adverse events (RR=0.86; 95% CI 0.27 to 2.66: I2=0%; two studies). Most common adverse events included abdominal pain and nausea.ConclusionThe effect of GT was no different to placebo for mean diarrhoea duration (low certainty on the evidence) and stool frequency at day 2 (high certainty) and for the presence of diarrhoea at day 3 (very low certainty) of vomiting (moderate certainty) and of adverse events (low certainty).PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018087902.

scholarly journals Defining the Features of Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials (rRCT): A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niamh O Shea ◽  
Joseph Eustace ◽  
Frances Shiely
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Narrative Synthesis ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Key Features ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials have been described as pragmatic studies utilising patient data embedded in large scale registries, to facilitate key clinical trial procedures such as case report completion, randomisation and follow up data. While the practice of utilising registries to support the conduct of randomised trials is increasing, the reporting of how a registry is used within a trial can vary, causing difficulty in identifying registry based randomised trials and interpreting their exact definition. Methods: The databases PubMed, Embase, Cinahl Plus, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a combination of subject headings, MeSH and free text terms. Search terms will be adapted accordingly for each database, with English language articles included and no other filters applied. Also, grey literature and reference lists will be searched, contacting trial authors for clarification when necessary. Two independent reviewers will complete study screening, selection and quality assessment. A preliminary synthesis will be conducted tabulating the relevant evidence into separate data extraction tables. A narrative synthesis approach will be adopted based on the Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews.Results: The present study will synthesise existing registry based randomised trial literature and define their key features.Conclusions: It is essential that trialists and researchers can review published trials and endeavour to duplicate trial designs. There is a lack of consensus in terms of the reporting of registry based randomised trials, making replication of this emerging trial design difficult. This review will clearly summarise and define the key features of these randomised trials, to allow researchers understand and reproduce the novel registry based randomised controlled trial methodology. Systematic Review Registration: PROPSERO CRD42020192419

scholarly journals Macrolides for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catalina Verdejo ◽  
Laura Vergara-Merino ◽  
Natalia Carvajal-Juliá ◽  
Nicolás Meza ◽  
Eva Madrid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Review Protocol

ObjectiveThis living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of macrolides for the treatment of patients with COVID-19.Data sources We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of macrolides — as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs — versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating macrolides in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case we find no direct evidence from randomised trials, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates.Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO Registration number CRD42020181032

scholarly journals Oxymetazoline for the treatment of rosacea-associated persistent facial erythema. Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geovanna Cárdenas ◽  
Francisco Novillo ◽  
Shuheng Lai ◽  
Héctor Fuenzalida ◽  
Francisca Verdugo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Facial Erythema ◽  
Central Register ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea.Data SourcesWe will conduct a comprehensive search in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Lilacs, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and grey literature, to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press and in progress).Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, data extraction, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE [1] system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.Ethics and DisseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.Protocol and RegistrationThis protocol was adapted to the specificities of the question assessed in this review and registered to PROSPERO with the ID CRD42020150262.

scholarly journals Cell-based therapies for COVID-19: A living systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Rada ◽  
Javiera Corbalán ◽  
Patricio Rojas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Open Platform ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Registration Number

ABSTRACT Objective This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the available evidence on the role of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Data sources We conducted searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. All the searches covered the period until April 23, 2020 (one day before submission). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We searched for randomised trials evaluating the effect of cell-based therapies versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Anticipating the lack of randomised trials directly addressing this question, we also searched for trials evaluating other coronavirus infections, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19. Two reviewers independently screened each study for eligibility. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates. Results We screened 1,043 records but no study was considered eligible. We identified 61 ongoing studies, including 39 randomised trials evaluating different types of cell-based therapies in COVID-19. Conclusions We did not find any studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to support or refute the use of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A substantial number of ongoing studies should provide valuable evidence to inform researchers and decision makers in the near future. PROSPERO Registration number CRD42020179711 Box 1 Linked resources in this Living Systematic Review Common protocol Common protocol for the systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews being conducted by the COVID-19 L·OVE Working Group. Available here Living review Web version of this systematic review, presented in a ‘living systematic review format’. This means it is continuously updated as soon as new evidence emerges. Available here Living OVerview of Evidence - L·OVE An open platform that uses artificial intelligence and a broad network of contributors to identify all of the evidence relevant to this and other healthcare questions, including those related to COVID-19. Available here

scholarly journals Prognostic factors for severity and mortality in patients infected with COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariel Izcovich ◽  
Martín Ragusa ◽  
Verónica Sanguine ◽  
Fernando Tortosa ◽  
Federico Espinosa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Traditional Media ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe objective of our systematic review is to identify prognostic factors that can potentially be used in decision-making related to the care of patients infected with COVID-19.DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence covered and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will continue until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).We will include studies that assess patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection and inform the relation between potential prognostic factors and death or disease severity. Two groups of two reviewers will independently screen studies for eligibility, extract data and assess the risk of bias. We will perform meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each prognostic factor and outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.PROSPERO RegistrationSubmitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document