ArticleJournal of vascular surgery2021
Cardiovascular disease due to novel coronavirus and the search for investigational therapies.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global, regional, and national burden and risk factors of ischemic heart disease, 1990-2021: an analysis of the global burden of disease study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Real-World Experience Assessing Mortality.Pharmacotherapy · 2020Article
- Putative Roles for Peptidylarginine Deiminases in COVID-19.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: The primary purpose of the study was to investigate and to summarize the registered trials that listed COVID-19 as the primary condition. Methods: We performed a search on ClinicalTrials.gov using the independent search terms COVID-19, SARS, and SARS-CoV-2 and then downloaded the data file on March 23, 2020. All trials were downloaded to a csv file and searched for appropriateness. Results: Of 124 registered trials, 56 (45.2%) were listed as recruiting. The majority (85 [68.5%]) were classified as interventional, 37 (29.8%) as observational, and one (0.8%) each as either expanded access: individual patients|treatment investigational new drug/protocol or expanded access: intermediate-size population|treatment investigational new drug/protocol. There were 67 (54.0%) trials that listed drug as the type of study. Immunologic and antiviral trials were the most common, representing approximately 30% and 21%, respectively. When immunologic and antiviral drugs were used alone or in combination, they represented 41.9% and 34.4%, respectively. Antimalarial agents are represented in 7.5% of trials. Approximately 14% of trials involved traditional Chinese medicine. The study agents used solely or in combination represented approximately 80% of therapeutic approaches to COVID-19. Conclusions: There was a large and quick response on ClinicalTrials.gov to the COVID-19 outbreak. Many of the registered trials are currently recruiting new patients, whereas some will begin in the near future. Specific potential experimental therapies, including dosing and monitoring, might be found by reviewing content. Within ClinicalTrials.gov, patients, family members, health care professionals, and researchers can search and find ongoing and future trials for COVID-19.
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.