ReviewCritical care explorations2021
Pharmacotherapy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Risk of Secondary Infections: A Single-Center Case Series and Narrative Review.
Review in Critical care explorations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Viral reactivations and co-infections in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Risk Factors Associated with the Development of Hospital-Acquired Infections in Hospitalized Patients with Severe COVID-19.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Rare Case of Latent Tuberculosis Reactivation Secondary to a COVID-19 Infection.Infectious disease reports · 2022Article
- Intracranial complications of hypercoagulability and superinfection in the setting of COVID-19: illustrative cases.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2022Article
- A Unique Triad of Invasive Sinusitis, Brain Abscess with Focal Cerebritis, and COVID-19.The American journal of case reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, immune modulators have been considered front-line candidates for the management of patients presenting with clinical symptoms secondary to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Although heavy emphasis has been placed on early clinical efficacy, we sought to evaluate the impact of pharmacologic approach to coronavirus disease 2019 within the ICU on secondary infections and clinical outcomes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (inception to March 2021) database search and manual selection of bibliographies from selected articles. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles relevant to coronavirus disease 2019, management of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-associated respiratory failure, and prevalence of secondary infections with pharmacotherapies were selected. The MeSH terms "COVID-19," "secondary infection," "SARS-CoV-2," "tocilizumab," and "corticosteroids" were used for article identification. Articles were narratively synthesized for this review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Current data surrounding the use of tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids for coronavirus disease 2019 management are limited given the short follow-up period and conflicting results between studies. Further complicating the understanding of immune modulator role is the lack of definitive understanding of clinical impact of the immune response in coronavirus disease 2019.
conclusionsBased on the current available literature, we suggest prolonged trials and follow-up intervals for those patients managed with immune modulating agents for the management of coronavirus disease 2019.
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.