ArticleCell reports. Medicine2022
Treating COVID-19: Evolving approaches to evidence in a pandemic.
Article in Cell reports. Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Remdesivir to Treat SARS-CoV-2 in Hospitalized Patients: Have the Guidelines Evolved With the Evidence?Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Pooled it
- "We're all just trying to do right by our patients": a qualitative study of healthcare and research personnel's moral experiences of engaging with COVID-19 research during the first wave of the pandemic.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Situation, Education, Innovation, and Recommendation: A Large-Scale Systematic Review of Advance Care Planning in the Age of COVID-19.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Ethical Obligation for Research During Public Health Emergencies: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Article
- Remdesivir: A Review in COVID-19.Drugs · 2023Review
- Characteristics and result reporting of registered COVID-19 clinical trials of Chinese and Indian traditional medicine: A comparative analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The COVID misinfodemic: not new, never more lethal.Trends in microbiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid pace of the COVID-19 pandemic precluded traditional approaches to evaluating clinical research and guidelines. We highlight notable successes and pitfalls of clinicians' new approaches to managing evidence amidst an unprecedented crisis. In "Era 1" (early 2020), clinicians relied on anecdote and social media, which democratized conversations on guidelines, but also led clinicians astray. "Era 2" (approximately late 2020 to early 2021) saw preprints that accelerated new interventions but suffered from a surfeit of poor-quality data. In the current era, clinicians consolidate the evidentiary gains of Era 2 with living, online clinical guidelines, but the public suffers from misinformation. The COVID-19 pandemic is a laboratory on how clinicians adapt to an absence of clinical guidance amidst an informational and healthcare crisis. Challenges remain as we integrate new approaches to innovations made in the traditional guideline process to confront both the long tail of COVID-19 and future pandemics.
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.