Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33189891›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of antimicrobial agents2021

Randomised controlled trials for COVID-19: evaluation of optimal randomisation methodologies-need for data validation of the completed trials and to improve ongoing and future randomised trial designs.

Venkata R Emani, Sanjeev Goswami, Dheeraj Nandanoor, Shaila R Emani, Nidhi K Reddy, Raghunath Reddy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of antimicrobial agents, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for COVID-19 in Pregnant Women.International journal of general medicine · 2021
    Article
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

6 authors.

Venkata R EmaniCentral Valley Cardiovascular Associates, Inc., 1148 Norman Drive, Suite #2, Manteca, CA 95336, USA. Electronic address: vemani@yahoo.com.
Sanjeev GoswamiSan Joaquin Critical Care Medical Group, 1801 E March Ln c300, Stockton, CA 95210, USA.
Dheeraj NandanoorSynergy Med, 1801 E March Ln STE D460, Stockton, CA 95210, USA.
Shaila R EmaniCentral Valley Cardiovascular Associates, Inc., 1148 Norman Drive, Suite #2, Manteca, CA 95336, USA.
Nidhi K ReddyStockton Primary Care, 805 N California St #102, Stockton, CA 95204, USA.
Raghunath ReddyStockton Primary Care, 805 N California St #102, Stockton, CA 95204, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the emerging COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, initially there were no proven treatment options. With the release of randomised controlled trial (RCT) results, we are beginning to see possible treatment options for COVID-19. The RECOVERY trial showed an absolute risk reduction in mortality by 2.8% with dexamethasone, and the ACTT-1 trial showed that treatment with remdesivir reduced the time to recovery by 4 days. Treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and lopinavir/ritonavir did not show any mortality benefit in either the RECOVERY or World Health Organization (WHO) Solidarity trials. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Brazilian HCQ trials did not show any benefit for HCQ based on the seven-point ordinal scale outcomes. The randomisation methodologies utilised in these controlled trials and the quality of published data were reviewed to examine their adaptability to treat patients. We found that the randomisation methodologies of these trials were suboptimal for matching the studied groups based on disease severity among critically-ill hospitalised COVID-19 patients with high mortality rates. The published literature is very limited regarding the disease severity metrics among the compared groups and failed to show that the data are without fatal sampling errors and sampling biases. We also found that there is a definite need for the validation of data in these trials along with additional important disease severity metrics to ensure that the trials' conclusions are accurate. We also propose proper randomisation methodologies for the design of RCTs for COVID-19 as well as guidance for the publication of COVID-19 trial results.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Drug TreatmentCOVID-19Critical IllnessHospitalizationHumansHydroxychloroquineLopinavirMortalityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRitonavirSelection BiasHydroxychloroquineLopinavirRitonavirCOVID-19MethodologyRandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID33189891
PMCPMC7659806

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.