ReviewJournal of research in pharmacy practice2026
Navigating Therapeutic Frontiers: A Meta-review and Meta-analysis of COVID-19 Treatment Options.
Review in Journal of research in pharmacy practice, 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
To assess the efficacy and safety of each therapeutic options in the treatment of COVID-19 by assessing the evidence from existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and to carry out an umbrella meta-analysis of all meta-analysis studies to assess the efficacy of each drug. A comprehensive search was carried out in electronic databases for systematic reviews and meta-analyses which compared the efficacy and/or safety of therapeutic options in the treatment of COVID-19. Findings from the reviews were synthesized using tables and forest plots and the pooled estimate of effect size using the DerSimonian and Laird method was used for the updated meta-analysis. The main outcome was mortality. 285 reviews with 152 meta-analyses were included, The analysis of systematic reviews contents indicated that most reviewed drugs were as follows: chroquine/hydroxychloroquine (
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.