SynthesisJournal of global health2020
An evidence-based framework for priority clinical research questions for COVID-19.
Synthesis in Journal of global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of air pollution (PM and NOEnvironmental research · 2020Pooled it
- Research prioritisation in preparedness for and response to outbreaks of high-consequence pathogens: a scoping review.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Optimising Clinical Epidemiology in Disease Outbreaks: Analysis of ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Case Report Form Utilisation.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Public health research priorities for WHO on COVID-19 in the South-East Asia Region: results of a prioritization survey.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Observational
- COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs): A Narrative Review from Prevention to Vaccination Strategy.Vaccines · 2021Review
- Global infectious disease research collaborations in crises: building capacity and inclusivity through cooperation.Globalization and health · 2021Article
- How the scientific community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: A subject-level time-trend bibliometric analysis.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal diseases: a single-center cross-sectional study in central Greece.Annals of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- A Multi-Disciplinary Review on the Aerobiology of COVID-19 in Dental Settings.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2021Article
- Leveraging a Cloud-Based Critical Care Registry for COVID-19 Pandemic Surveillance and Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Article
- Using Nominal Group Technique to Elucidate a COVID-19 Research Agenda for Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Populations.International journal of MCH and AIDS · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOn 31 December, 2019, the World Health Organization China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown aetiology. Since then, there have been over 75 000 cases globally of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), 2000 deaths, and over 14 000 cases recovered. Outbreaks of novel agents represent opportunities for clinical research to inform real-time public health action. In 2018, we conducted a systematic review to identify priority research questions for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Here, we review information available on COVID-19 and provide an evidenced-based framework for priority clinical research in the current outbreak.
methodsThree bibliographic databases were searched to identify clinical studies published on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV in the outbreak setting. Studies were grouped thematically according to clinical research questions addressed. In February 2020, available information on COVID19 was reviewed and compared to the results of the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV systematic review.
resultsFrom the research objectives for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, ten themes in the literature were identified: Clinical characterisation, prognosis, diagnosis, clinical management, viral pathogenesis, epidemiological characterisation, infection prevention and control/transmission, susceptibility, psychosocial, and aetiology. For COVID19, some information on clinical presentation, diagnostic testing, and aetiology is available but many clinical research gaps have yet to be filled.
conclusionsBased on a systematic review of other severe coronaviruses, we summarise the state of clinical research for COVID-19, highlight the research gaps, and provide recommendations for the implementation of standardised protocols. Data based on internationally standardised protocols will inform clinical practice real-time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.