SynthesisGaceta sanitaria
[Review of new evidence about the possible vertical transmission of coronavirus disease-2019].
Synthesis in Gaceta sanitaria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct a systematic review of original peer-reviewed studies, containing data on the identification of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples of amniotic fluid, placenta or membranes, umbilical cord blood, and human milk, from women with a clinically or confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. These studies should have been published after the guide for the management of patients with COVID-19 from World Health Organization guide (available in March 13, 2020).
resultsSeventeen studies were included, in which 143 clinical samples were identified (38 of amniotic fluid; 34 of placentas or membranes; 39 from umbilical cord blood and 32 from human milk). Among the 143 samples, nine were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (one amniotic fluid sample obtained before rupturing the membranes; six samples of placenta or membranes, although authors indicate the possibility of contamination by maternal blood in three of these, and two samples of human milk).
conclusionsFollowing our search criteria, we found no studies that demonstrate the detection of SARS-CoV-2, in conjunction with viral isolation and the evaluation of the infective capacity of viral particles, in clinical samples of amniotic fluid, placenta or membranes, umbilical cord blood and human milk, from women with a confirmed or clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. However, vertical transmission cannot be ruled out, larger studies are required that ideally locate in situ RNA and protein of SARS-CoV-2, as well as isolation that demonstrate the infective capacity of the viral particles.
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.