ReviewOpen forum infectious diseases2021
Overlooked Shortcomings of Observational Studies of Interventions in Coronavirus Disease 2019: An Illustrated Review for the Clinician.
Review in Open forum infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in reducing hospitalization and mortality among the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cefazolin for Methicillin-SusceptibleThe New England journal of medicine · 2026Trial
- Decoding Immuno-Competence: A Novel Analysis of Complete Blood Cell Count Data in COVID-19 Outcomes.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Causal links between sedentary behavior, physical activity, and psychiatric disorders: a Mendelian randomization study.Annals of general psychiatry · 2024Article
- Lessons learned: avoiding bias via multi-state analysis of patients' trajectories in real-time.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Current Challenges With the Use of Test-Negative Designs for Modeling COVID-19 Vaccination and Outcomes.American journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Safety and Efficacy of a MEURI Program for the Use of High Dose Ivermectin in COVID-19 Patients.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Response to "Overlooked Shortcomings of Observational Studies of Interventions in Coronavirus Disease 2019: An Illustrated Review for the Clinician" by Tleyjeh et al.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Real-Life Effectiveness and Safety of Baricitinib as Adjunctive to Standard-of-Care Treatment in Hospitalized Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- The Use of Tocilizumab in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection across the globe triggered an unprecedented increase in research activities that resulted in an astronomical publication output of observational studies. However, most studies failed to apply fully the necessary methodological techniques that systematically deal with different biases and confounding, which not only limits their scientific merit but may result in harm through misleading information. In this article, we address a few important biases that can seriously threaten the validity of observational studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We focus on treatment selection bias due to patients' preference on goals of care, medical futility and disability bias, survivor bias, competing risks, and the misuse of propensity score analysis. We attempt to raise awareness and to help readers assess shortcomings of observational studies of interventions in COVID-19.
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.