scholarly journals Incidence rate and basic reproduction number of Coronavirus diseases (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hailay Abrha Gesesew ◽  
William Mude ◽  
Tafadzwa Nyanhanda ◽  
Lillian Mwanri

Abstract Background : World Health Organization declared Coronavirus (COVID-19) as a newly emerging disease on 31 December 2019. In a space of two-months, there have been several studies reporting incidence rates, incubation periods, fatality rates, basic and effective reproduction numbers of the disease. However, the data have not been synthesized and pooled together to determine the global average. Objective : The present study aims to systematically review available global evidence on incidence rates, and basic and effective reproduction numbers of COVID-19. Methods : This is a protocol for a systematic review of available quantitative studies published in English. Studies which describe the incidence rates, and basic and effective reproduction numbers of COVID-19 will be included in the search. Initially, search term concepts will be constructed through a preliminary search on Google scholar. Then, we will perform a full systematic search using the identified concepts in the following electronic bibliographic databases: SCOPUS, PubMed, Web of Sciences and CINAHL. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) will be used to schematically present the full search strategy. Standardised Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quality appraisal and selection tools, and data extraction tools will be used to recruit studies and extract data from the included studies, respectively. Thematic analysis will be used to analyse the non-quantifiable data, and meta-analysis will be used to pool the quantitative information.

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1900655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Cohen ◽  
Victor Dahl Mathiasen ◽  
Thomas Schön ◽  
Christian Wejse

In 1999, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that one-third of the world's population had latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which was recently updated to one-fourth. However, this is still based on controversial assumptions in combination with tuberculin skin test (TST) surveys. Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) with a higher specificity than TST have since been widely implemented, but never used to estimate the global LTBI prevalence.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of LTBI estimates based on both IGRA and TST results published between 2005 and 2018. Regional and global estimates of LTBI prevalence were calculated. Stratification was performed for low, intermediate and high TB incidence countries and a pooled estimate for each area was calculated using a random effects model.Among 3280 studies screened, we included 88 studies from 36 countries with 41 IGRA (n=67 167) and 67 TST estimates (n=284 644). The global prevalence of LTBI was 24.8% (95% CI 19.7–30.0%) and 21.2% (95% CI 17.9–24.4%), based on IGRA and a 10-mm TST cut-off, respectively. The prevalence estimates correlated well to WHO incidence rates (Rs=0.70, p<0.001).In the first study of the global prevalence of LTBI derived from both IGRA and TST surveys, we found that one-fourth of the world's population is infected. This is of relevance, as both tests, although imperfect, are used to identify individuals eligible for preventive therapy. Enhanced efforts are needed targeting the large pool of latently infected individuals, as this constitutes an enormous source of potential active tuberculosis.


PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. e1003566
Author(s):  
Claire J. Calderwood ◽  
James P. Wilson ◽  
Katherine L. Fielding ◽  
Rebecca C. Harris ◽  
Aaron S. Karat ◽  
...  

Background Two weeks’ isolation is widely recommended for people commencing treatment for pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). The evidence that this corresponds to clearance of potentially infectious tuberculous mycobacteria in sputum is not well established. This World Health Organization–commissioned review investigated sputum sterilisation dynamics during TB treatment. Methods and findings For the main analysis, 2 systematic literature searches of OvidSP MEDLINE, Embase, and Global Health, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus were conducted to identify studies with data on TB infectiousness (all studies to search date, 1 December 2017) and all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for drug-susceptible TB (from 1 January 1990 to search date, 20 February 2018). Included articles reported on patients receiving effective treatment for culture-confirmed drug-susceptible pulmonary TB. The outcome of interest was sputum bacteriological conversion: the proportion of patients having converted by a defined time point or a summary measure of time to conversion, assessed by smear or culture. Any study design where more than 10 participants were included was considered. Record sifting and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Random effects meta-analyses were performed. A narrative summary additionally describes the results of a systematic search for data evaluating infectiousness from humans to experimental animals (PubMed, all studies to 27 March 2018). Other evidence on duration of infectiousness—including studies reporting on cough dynamics, human tuberculin skin test conversion, or early bactericidal activity of TB treatments—was outside the scope of this review. The literature search was repeated on 22 November 2020, at the request of the editors, to identify studies published after the previous censor date. Four small studies reporting 3 different outcome measures were identified, which included no data that would alter the findings of the review; they are not included in the meta-analyses. Of 5,290 identified records, 44 were included. Twenty-seven (61%) were RCTs and 17 (39%) were cohort studies. Thirteen studies (30%) reported data from Africa, 12 (27%) from Asia, 6 (14%) from South America, 5 (11%) from North America, and 4 (9%) from Europe. Four studies reported data from multiple continents. Summary estimates suggested smear conversion in 9% of patients at 2 weeks (95% CI 3%–24%, 1 single study [N = 1]), and 82% of patients at 2 months of treatment (95% CI 78%–86%, N = 10). Among baseline smear-positive patients, solid culture conversion occurred by 2 weeks in 5% (95% CI 0%–14%, N = 2), increasing to 88% at 2 months (95% CI 84%–92%, N = 20). At equivalent time points, liquid culture conversion was achieved in 3% (95% CI 1%–16%, N = 1) and 59% (95% CI 47%–70%, N = 8). Significant heterogeneity was observed. Further interrogation of the data to explain this heterogeneity was limited by the lack of disaggregation of results, including by factors such as HIV status, baseline smear status, and the presence or absence of lung cavitation. Conclusions This systematic review found that most patients remained culture positive at 2 weeks of TB treatment, challenging the view that individuals are not infectious after this interval. Culture positivity is, however, only 1 component of infectiousness, with reduced cough frequency and aerosol generation after TB treatment initiation likely to also be important. Studies that integrate our findings with data on cough dynamics could provide a more complete perspective on potential transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by individuals on treatment. Trial registration Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 85226.


BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n526
Author(s):  
François Lamontagne ◽  
Thomas Agoritsas ◽  
Reed Siemieniuk ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Jessica Bartoszko ◽  
...  

Abstract Clinical question What is the role of drugs in preventing covid-19? Why does this matter? There is widespread interest in whether drug interventions can be used for the prevention of covid-19, but there is uncertainty about which drugs, if any, are effective. The first version of this living guideline focuses on the evidence for hydroxychloroquine. Subsequent updates will cover other drugs being investigated for their role in the prevention of covid-19. Recommendation The guideline development panel made a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine for individuals who do not have covid-19 (high certainty). How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development panel of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (6 trials and 6059 participants) found that hydroxychloroquine had a small or no effect on mortality and admission to hospital (high certainty evidence). There was a small or no effect on laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (moderate certainty evidence) but probably increased adverse events leading to discontinuation (moderate certainty evidence). The panel judged that almost all people would not consider this drug worthwhile. In addition, the panel decided that contextual factors such as resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity for countries and healthcare systems were unlikely to alter the recommendation. The panel considers that this drug is no longer a research priority and that resources should rather be oriented to evaluate other more promising drugs to prevent covid-19. Updates This is a living guideline. New recommendations will be published in this article and signposted by update notices to this guideline. Readers note This is the first version of the living guideline for drugs to prevent covid-19. It complements the WHO living guideline on drugs to treat covid-19. When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.


Author(s):  
Afsaneh Noormandi ◽  
Mohammad Fathalipour ◽  
Reza Daryabeygi-Khotbehsara ◽  
Soheil Hassanipour

Background and objective: COVID-19 has since been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), infecting millions worldwide. The use of Interferon (INF) subtypes previously examined in the treatment of SARS and MERS is also being initiated in some clinical trials. Although different clinical trials were evaluated IFNs in the treatment of COVID-19, their efficacy and safety remain unknown. Therefore, this study aims to systematically assess IFNs efficacy and safety in treating patients with COVID-19. Methods: The protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register (CRD42020200643) on 24 July 2020. This protocol has been arranged according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist. Discussion: Due to lack of approved medication for the covid-19 treatment and also various mutations of this virus, evaluated the efficacy and safety of medications by various studies could help for finding treatments with high effectiveness. IFNs are one of the medications that have been administered in covid-19 infection.  Moreover, the best time of administration and dose of this medication was unknown. Although meta-analysis is a potent source for assessing the accuracy of subjects, heterogeneity of articles is a potent limitation of our work.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brice Batomen ◽  
Lynne Moore ◽  
Mabel Carabali ◽  
Pier-Alexandre Tardif ◽  
Howard Champion ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The implementation of trauma systems in many high-income countries over the last 50 years has led to important reductions in injury mortality and disability in many healthcare jurisdictions. Injury organizations including the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Association of Canada as well as the World Health Organization provide consensus-based recommendations on resources and processes for optimal injury care. Many hospitals treating trauma patients seek verification to demonstrate that they meet these recommendations. This process may be labeled differently across jurisdictions. In Canada for example, it is called accreditation, but it has the same objective and very similar modalities. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence on the effectiveness of trauma center verification for improving clinical processes and patient outcomes in injury care. Methods We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between trauma center verification and hospital mortality (primary outcome), as well as morbidity, resource utilization, and processes of care (secondary outcomes). We will search CINAHL, EMBASE, HealthStar, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases, as well as key injury organization websites for gray literature. We will assess the methodological quality of studies using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies – of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. We are planning to conduct a meta-analysis if feasible based on the number of included studies and their heterogeneity. We will evaluate the quality of cumulative evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology. Discussion This review will provide a synthesis of the body of evidence on trauma center verification effectiveness. Results could reinforce current verification modalities and may suggest ways to optimize them. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an international clinical conference. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018107083.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e029206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu He ◽  
Nianyi Sun ◽  
Zhiqiang Wang ◽  
Wenchen Zou

IntroductionRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive brain stimulation approach, might be a promising technique in the management of insomnia. A systematic review of the available literature on this topic is warranted. The systematic review described in this protocol aims to investigate the efficacy of rTMS as a physical therapy in patients with insomnia.Methods and analysisThis protocol was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We will retrieve relevant literatures across the following electronic bibliographic databases: CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PEDro, CBM, CNKI, WANFANG and VIP. A manual search of the reference lists of all relevant articles will be performed for any additional studies. We will include randomised controlled trials published in English and Chinese examining efficacy of rTMS on patients with insomnia. Two reviewers will independently complete the article selection, data extraction and rating. PEDro scale will be used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Narrative and quantitative synthesis will be done accordingly.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required for this review. The results of this review will be disseminated in a peer-review journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018115033.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kofi Boamah Mensah ◽  
Adwoa Bemah Boamah Mensah ◽  
Varsha Bangalee ◽  
Frasia Oosthuizen

Abstract Background: The recent outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), or COVID-19 with no approved medicines has led to global health threat. Currently, repositioning of old medicines seems the most responsible strategy for potential cure and prevention COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have shown promising efficacy against COVID-19 related pneumonia in clinical studies. However, the mode of drug action of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 infection is not clear. This review aims to gather evidence on antiviral activity and possible mechanism of drug action of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on SARS-CoV-2, including in-vitro, animal studies, and studies in humans.Method: A structured search of five bibliographic databases namely; Medline, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar will be undertaken to retrieve studies that describe the antiviral activity and possible mechanism of drug action of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on SARS-CoV-2. No restrictions will be placed on publication date, but studies will be limited to only publications in English. Duplication of studies will be removed using EndNote reference manager. Three authors will screen the citations independently based on inclusion criteria. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias will be done independently. Meta-analysis of selected studies will be done wherever suitable.Discussion: We expect that data that will be synthesis will provide enough information to inform COVID-19 care pathways and help clinicians caring for COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, this systematic review will expand our knowledge on the benefits and risks of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19 patients and identify areas of controversies, and quality assessment. This review will provide vital information needed in the development of contextualized guidelines for the management of COVID-19 patients.Systematic review registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7DJMU


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document