SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Remdesivir for the treatment of children hospitalized with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRemdesivir (RDV) is an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of COVID-19 in children weighing at least 3.5 kg. While its safety and efficacy are well established in adults, data in pediatric populations remain limited and are largely extrapolated from adult studies. Therefore, we aimed to assess the clinical outcomes and safety of RDV in pediatric patients.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating RDV in hospitalized children under 18 years with COVID-19. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and the level of respiratory support (baseline and highest). The secondary outcome was the safety profile of RDV identified by adverse events and treatment discontinuation. Meta-analysis was performed only on patients who received RDV.
resultsFrom 1298 records, 16 studies were included. A total of 722 patients who received remdesivir were included in this study. Pooled analysis at admission showed that 28% of patients required no oxygen, 23% needed low-flow oxygen, 21% needed high-flow oxygen, 11% required non-invasive ventilation (NIV), and 9% were treated with mechanical ventilation (MV). During hospitalization, the highest respiratory support required was no oxygen in 27%, low-flow oxygen in 33%, high-flow oxygen in 32%, NIV in 5%, and MV in 19%. Overall mortality was 2% (95% CI: 0.00, 0.04, I
conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that RDV has an acceptable safety profile in pediatric patients with COVID-19. The most commonly reported adverse events were elevated hepatic enzymes and hypertension, with occasional reports of bradycardia and increased creatinine. The pooled results should be interpreted with caution due to study heterogeneity and possible publication bias.
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.