SynthesisJournal of medical virology2021
Systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of treatment options against SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Synthesis in Journal of medical virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of tocilizumab in the treatment of COVID-19: An umbrella review.Reviews in medical virology · 2022Pooled it
- Potential limitations in systematic review studies assessing the effect of the main intervention for treatment/therapy of COVID-19 patients: An overview.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Mortality outcomes with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 from an international collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials.Nature communications · 2021Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cancer Patients Affected by a Novel Coronavirus.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of treatment options against SARS-CoV-2 infection.Journal of medical virology · 2021Pooled it
- Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review ofTheranostics · 2021Pooled it
- Risk assessment for cardiovascular adverse drug events in the ICU: Case study on COVID-19 patients.PloS one · 2026Article
- Dexamethasone chronotherapy of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit: an exploratory study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Predicting Mutational Effects on Receptor Binding of the Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Variants.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2021Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- What gastroenterologists should know about SARS-CoV 2 vaccine: World Endoscopy Organization perspective.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Review
- Tocilizumab in COVID-19: Factors Associated With Mortality Before and After Treatment.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer patients affected by a novel coronavirus.medRxiv : the preprint server for health 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment options for severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are limited with no clarity on efficacy and safety profiles. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on patients ≥18 years reporting data on therapeutic interventions in SARS-CoV-2. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes were rates of mechanical ventilation, viral clearance, adverse events, discharge, and progression to severe disease. Pooled rates and odds ratios (OR) were calculated. Twenty-nine studies with 5207 patients were included. Pooled all-cause mortality in intervention arm was 12.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1%-17.4%). Mortality was significantly higher for studies using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for intervention (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.97-1.89). Adverse events were also higher in HCQ subgroup (OR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.60-9.45). There was no difference in other secondary outcomes. There is a need for well-designed randomized clinical trials for further investigation of every therapeutic intervention for further insight into different therapeutic options.
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.