ArticlePloS one2020
Characteristics of academic publications, preprints, and registered clinical trials on the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 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
55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of acute and emergency care interventions for adolescents and adults with severe acute respiratory infections including COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries.Journal of global health · 2022Pooled it
- A metaresearch study revealed susceptibility of Covid-19 treatment research to white hat bias: first, do no harm.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- COVID-19-related medical research: a meta-research and critical appraisal.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Looking beyond the origin of SARS-CoV-2: Significant strategic aspects during the five-year journey of COVID-19 vaccine development.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Review
- [Prioritization of research questions in health crises-presentation of a concept developed during the COVID-19 pandemic].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Article
- Preprint pointers from a long COVID scoping review: considerations for source selection and searching.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2024Article
- Clinical outcomes and considerations in outpatient with COVID-19 receiving remdesivir therapy.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Confidence score: a data-driven measure for inclusive systematic reviews considering unpublished preprints.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Academic publication activities and perspectives of rheumatology practitioners in the COVID-19 pandemic.Archives of rheumatology · 2023Article
- Rapid reviews methods series: Guidance on literature search.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- PCovNet+: A CNN-VAE anomaly detection framework with LSTM embeddings for smartwatch-based COVID-19 detection.Engineering applications of artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- Changing word meanings in biomedical literature reveal pandemics and new technologies.BioData mining · 2023Article
- Publications on COVID-19 in radiology journals in 2020 and 2021: bibliometric citation and co-citation network analysis.European radiology · 2023Article
- Searching for evidence in public health emergencies: a white paper of best practices.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2023Article
- Systematic Guidelines for Effective Utilization of COVID-19 Databases in Genomic, Epidemiologic, and Clinical Research.Viruses · 2023Review
- Weekly updating of guideline recommendations was feasible: the Australian National COVID-19 clinical evidence Taskforce.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Changes in health communication in the age of COVID-19: A study on the dissemination of preprints to the public.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Using an expert survey and user feedback to construct PRECHECK: A checklist to evaluate preprints on COVID-19 and beyond.F1000Research · 2023Article
- How COVID-19 Affected the Journal Impact Factor of High Impact Medical Journals: Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Robustness of evidence reported in preprints during peer review.The Lancet. Global health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has unleashed a deluge of publications. For this cross-sectional study we compared the amount and reporting characteristics of COVID-19-related academic articles and preprints and the number of ongoing clinical trials and systematic reviews. To do this, we searched the PubMed database of citations and abstracts for published life science journals by using appropriate combinations of medical subject headings (MeSH terms), and the COVID-19 section of the MedRxiv and BioRxiv archives up to 20 May 2020 (21 weeks). In addition, we searched Clinicaltrial.gov, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, EU Clinical Trials Register, and 15 other trial registers, as well as PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews. The characteristics of each publication were extracted. Regression analyses and Z tests were used to detect publication trends and their relative proportions. A total of 3635 academic publications and 3805 preprints were retrieved. Only 8.6% (n = 329) of the preprints were already published in indexed journals. The number of academic and preprint publications increased significantly over time (p<0.001). Case reports (6% academic vs 0.9% preprints; p<0.001) and letters (17.4% academic vs 0.5% preprints; p<0.001) accounted for a greater share of academic compared to preprint publications. Differently, randomized controlled trials (0.22% vs 0.63%; p<0.001) and systematic reviews (0.08% vs 5%) made up a greater share of the preprints. The relative proportion of clinical studies registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, and EU Clinical Trials Register was 57.9%, 49.5%, and 98.9%, respectively, most of which were still "recruiting". PROSPERO listed 962 systematic review protocols. Preprints were slightly more prevalent than academic articles but both were increasing in number. The void left by the lack of primary studies was filled by an outpour of immediate opinions (i.e., letters to the editor) published in PubMed-indexed journals. Summarizing, preprints have gained traction as a publishing response to the demand for prompt access to empirical, albeit not peer-reviewed, findings during the present pandemic.
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.