Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32845568›Full record

SynthesisReviews in medical virology2020

Interleukin-6 in Covid-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Eric A Coomes, Hourmazd Haghbayan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reviews in medical virology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 514 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
514citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

514 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 806 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

454 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eric A CoomesDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2852-5127
Hourmazd HaghbayanDivision of Cardiology, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3384-0650
University of Toronto · CAWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coronaviruses may activate dysregulated host immune responses. As exploratory studies have suggested that interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels are elevated in cases of complicated Covid-19, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence in this field. We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies investigating the immunological response in Covid-19; additional grey literature searches were undertaken. Study selection and data abstraction was undertaken independently by two authors. Meta-analysis was undertaken using random effects models to compute ratios of means with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Eight published studies and two preprints (n = 1798) were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analysis of mean IL-6 concentrations demonstrated 2.9-fold higher levels in patients with complicated Covid-19 compared with patients with noncomplicated disease (six studies; n = 1302; 95%CI, 1.17-7.19; I

Indexed as

Host-Pathogen InteractionsBiomarkersCOVID-19Cytokine Release SyndromeCytokinesHumansInterleukin-6PrognosisPublication BiasSARS-CoV-2BiomarkersCytokinesInterleukin-6Covid-19cytokine stormIL6interleukinSARS-CoV-2Tocilizumab

Identifiers

PMID32845568
PMCPMC7460877
OpenAlexW3081502886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.