Assessment of Duplicate Evidence in Systematic Reviews of Imaging Findings of Children With COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Perez-Gaxiola G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7791356 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Assessment of Duplicate Evidence in Systematic Reviews of Imaging Findings of Children With COVID-19.
Pérez-Gaxiola Giordano G Verdugo-Paiva Francisca F Rada Gabriel G Flórez Iván D ID
JAMA network open 20210104 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is a novel coronavirus infection that can cause a severe respiratory illness and has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Because children appear to be less severely affected than adults, their imaging appearances have not been extensively reported.ObjectiveTo systematically review available literature regarding imaging findings in paediatric cases of COVID-19.Materials and methodsWe searched four databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar) for articles describing imaging findings in children with COVID-19. We included all modalities, age <18 years, and foreign language articles, using descriptive statistics to identify patterns and locations of imaging findings, and their association with outcomes.ResultsTwenty-two articles were included, reporting chest imaging findings in 431 children, of whom 421 (97.7%) underwent CT. Criteria for imaging were lacking. At diagnosis, 143/421 (34.0%) had a normal CT. Abnormalities were more common in the lower lobes and were predominantly unilateral. The most common imaging pattern was ground-glass opacification (159/255, 62.4%). None of the studies described lymphadenopathy, while pleural effusions were rare (three cases). Improvement at follow-up CT imaging (3-15 days later) was seen in 29/100 (29%), remained normal in 25/100 (25%) and progressed in 9/100 (9%).ConclusionCT chest findings in children with COVID-19 are frequently normal or mild. Lower lobes are predominantly affected by patchy ground-glass opacification. Appearances at follow-up remain normal or improve in the majority of children. Chest CT imaging adds little to the further management of the patient and should be reserved for severe cases or for identifying alternative diagnoses.
| S-EPMC7300372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chest computed tomography (CT) is frequently used in diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for detecting abnormal changes in the lungs and monitoring disease progression during the treatment process. Furthermore, CT imaging appearances are correlated with patients presenting with different clinical scenarios, such as early versus advanced stages, asymptomatic versus symptomatic patients, and severe versus nonsevere situations. However, its role as a screening and diagnostic tool in COVID-19 remains to be clarified. This article provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature on chest CT imaging findings with the aim of highlighting the contribution and judicious use of CT in the diagnosis of COVID-19. A search of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar and Scopus was performed to identify studies reporting chest imaging findings in COVID-19. Chest imaging abnormalities associated with COVID-19 were extracted from the eligible studies and diagnostic value of CT in detecting these abnormal changes was compared between studies consisting of both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. A random-effects model was used to perform meta-analysis for calculation of pooled mean values and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of abnormal imaging findings. Fifty-five studies met the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. Pulmonary lesions more often involved bilateral lungs (78%, 95% CI: 45-100%) and were more likely to have a peripheral (65.35%, 95% CI: 25.93-100%) and peripheral plus central distribution (31.12%, 95% CI: 1.96-74.07%), but less likely to have a central distribution (3.57%, 95% CI: 0.99-9.80%). Ground glass opacities (GGO) (58.05%, 95% CI: 16.67-100%), consolidation (44.18%, 95% CI: 1.61-71.46%) and GGO plus consolidation (52.99%, 95% CI: 19.05-76.79%) were the most common findings reported in 94.5% (52/55) of the studies, followed by air bronchogram (42.50%, 95% CI: 7.78-80.39%), linear opacities (41.29%, 95% CI: 7.44-65.06%), crazy-paving pattern (23.57%, 95% CI: 3.13-91.67%) and interlobular septal thickening (22.91%, 95% CI: 0.90-80.49%). CT has low specificity in differentiating pneumonia-related lung changes due to significant overlap between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients with no significant differences in most of the imaging findings between these two groups (P>0.05). Furthermore, normal CT (13.31%, 95% CI: 0.74-38.36%) was reported in 26 (47.3%) studies. Despite widespread use of CT in the diagnosis of COVID-19 patients based on the current literature, CT findings are not pathognomonic as it lacks specificity in differentiating imaging appearances caused by different types of pneumonia. Further, there is a relatively high percentage of normal CT scans. Use of CT as a first-line diagnostic or screening tool in COVID-19 is not recommended.
| S-EPMC7242306 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11295717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA hyperinflammatory immune-mediated shock syndrome has been recognised in children exposed to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).ObjectiveTo describe typical imaging findings in children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19.Materials and methodsDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, imaging studies and clinical data from children treated for multisystem inflammatory syndrome were collected from multiple centres. Standardised case templates including demographic, biochemical and imaging information were completed by participating centres and reviewed by paediatric radiologists and paediatricians.ResultsWe included 37 children (21 boys; median age 8.0 years). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing was positive for SARS-CoV-2 in 15/37 (41%) children and immunoglobulins in 13/19 children (68%). Common clinical presentations were fever (100%), abdominal pain (68%), rash (54%), conjunctivitis (38%) and cough (32%). Thirty-three children (89%) showed laboratory or imaging findings of cardiac involvement. Thirty of the 37 children (81%) required admission to the intensive care unit, with good recovery in all cases. Chest radiographs demonstrated cardiomegaly in 54% and signs of pulmonary venous hypertension/congestion in 73%. The most common chest CT abnormalities were ground-glass and interstitial opacities (83%), airspace consolidation (58%), pleural effusion (58%) and bronchial wall thickening (42%). Echocardiography revealed impaired cardiac function in half of cases (51%) and coronary artery abnormalities in 14%. Cardiac MRI showed myocardial oedema in 58%, pericardial effusion in 42% and decreased left ventricular function in 25%. Twenty children required imaging for abdominal symptoms, the commonest abnormalities being free fluid (71%) and terminal ileum wall thickening (57%). Twelve children underwent brain imaging, showing abnormalities in two cases.ConclusionChildren with multisystem inflammatory syndrome showed pulmonary, cardiac, abdominal and brain imaging findings, reflecting the multisystem inflammatory disease. Awareness of the imaging features of this disease is important for early diagnosis and treatment.
| S-EPMC8076442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In order to identify differentially abundant proteins, human plasma samples from COVID-19 patients with either a mild or moderate (MM) or a critical or severe (CS) disease course from acute phase of infection were analyzed on antibody microarrays 998 different proteins by 1,425 antibodies.
2023-03-15 | E-MTAB-12777 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:In order to identify differentially abundant proteins, human plasma samples from COVID-19 patients with either a mild or moderate (MM) or a critical or severe (CS) disease course from the acute phases of infection were analyzed on antibody microarrays targeting 351 different proteins by 517 antibodies.
2023-04-11 | E-MTAB-12779 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:ObjectiveCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, but there is so far no comprehensive analysis of all known symptoms of the disease. Our study aimed to present a comprehensive picture of the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 using an evidence map.MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library from their inception to March 16, 2021. We included systematic reviews reporting the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 patients. We followed the PRISMA guidelines, and the study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were done by two individuals independently. We assessed the methodological quality of the studies using AMSTAR. We visually presented the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 and their prevalence.ResultsA total of 102 systematic reviews were included, of which, 68 studies (66.7%) were of high quality, 19 studies (18.6%) of medium quality, and 15 studies (14.7%) of low quality. We identified a total of 74 symptoms including 17 symptoms of the respiratory system, 21 symptoms of the neurological system, 10 symptoms of the gastrointestinal system, 16 cutaneous symptoms, and 10 ocular symptoms. The most common symptoms were fever (67 studies, ranging 16.3%-91.0%, pooled prevalence: 64.6%, 95%CI, 61.3%-67.9%), cough (68 studies, ranging 30.0%-72.2%, pooled prevalence: 53.6%, 95%CI, 52.1%-55.1%), muscle soreness (56 studies, ranging 3.0%-44.0%, pooled prevalence: 18.7%, 95%CI, 16.3%-21.3%), and fatigue (52 studies, ranging 3.3%-58.5%, pooled prevalence: 29.4%, 95%CI, 27.5%-31.3%). The prevalence estimates for COVID-19 symptoms were generally lower in neonates, children and adolescents, and pregnant women than in the general populations.ConclusionAt least 74 different clinical manifestations are associated with COVID-19. Fever, cough, muscle soreness, and fatigue are the most common, but attention should also be paid to the rare symptoms that can help in the early diagnosis of the disease.
| S-EPMC9353366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale, aims, and objectivesCOVID-19 has caused an ongoing public health crisis. Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been performed to synthesize evidence for better understanding this new disease. However, some concerns have been raised about rapid COVID-19 research. This meta-epidemiological study aims to methodologically assess the current systematic reviews and meta-analyses on COVID-19.MethodsWe searched in various databases for systematic reviews with meta-analyses published between 1 January 2020 and 31 October 2020. We extracted their basic characteristics, data analyses, evidence appraisal, and assessment of publication bias and heterogeneity.ResultsWe identified 295 systematic reviews on COVID-19. The median time from submission to acceptance was 33 days. Among these systematic reviews, 73.9% evaluated clinical manifestations or comorbidities of COVID-19. Stata was the most used software programme (43.39%). The odds ratio was the most used effect measure (34.24%). Moreover, 28.14% of the systematic reviews did not present evidence appraisal. Among those reporting the risk of bias results, 14.64% of studies had a high risk of bias. Egger's test was the most used method for assessing publication bias (38.31%), while 38.66% of the systematic reviews did not assess publication bias. The I2 statistic was widely used for assessing heterogeneity (92.20%); many meta-analyses had high values of I2 . Among the meta-analyses using the random-effects model, 75.82% did not report the methods for model implementation; among those meta-analyses reporting implementation methods, the DerSimonian-Laird method was the most used one.ConclusionsThe current systematic reviews and meta-analyses on COVID-19 might suffer from low transparency, high heterogeneity, and suboptimal statistical methods. It is recommended that future systematic reviews on COVID-19 strictly follow well-developed guidelines. Sensitivity analyses may be performed to examine how the synthesized evidence might depend on different methods for appraising evidence, assessing publication bias, and implementing meta-analysis models.
| S-EPMC8242754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: This study aims to characterize the early innate and adaptive responses induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults over time up to 8 weeks post symptoms onset (POS). We report the gene signature of COVID-19 over the course of the disease in both age groups. The kinetic of infection was divided in 5-time intervals according to the calculated days POS: interval 1 (0-5), interval 2 (6-14), interval 3 (15-22), interval 4 (23-35), and interval 5 (36-81). Methods: RNA extraction was performed automatically via the PAXgene Blood miRNA Kit and the QIAcube instrument (Qiagen) following the manufacturer’s protocol. RNA concentration and quality were assessed by using the Qubit instrument (Invitrogen) and the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer, respectively. The Stranded Total RNA Ribo-Zero Plus kit from Illumina was used for the library preparation with 100 ng of total RNA as input. Library molarity and quality were assessed with the Qubit and Tapestation using a DNA High sensitivity chip (Agilent Technologies). Libraries were pooled at 2 nM for clustering and sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 sequencer for a minimum of 30 million single-end 100 reads per sample. Main results: (I) we observed an antiviral-IFN-signature and innate-cell-activation within the first 5 days post symptoms onset (POS), while genes associated with CD4 T-cell responses, plasma cells and immunoglobulin were upregulated in both age groups during the first two weeks POS, indicative of SARS-CoV-2-specific adaptive immune responses; (II) in adults, genes associated with IFN antiviral responses and activated dendritic cells were maintained during the second week of disease, and subsided only after 14 days. By contrast, those transcriptome changes subsided already after 5 days in children.
2021-09-22 | GSE166190 | GEO
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews, and to analyze trends and gaps in the quality, clinical topics, author countries, and populations of the reviews using an evidence mapping approach.Study design and settingA structured search for systematic reviews concerning COVID-19 was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Campbell Library, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP from inception until June 2020. The quality of each review was assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) checklist and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.ResultsIn total, 243 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, over 50% of which (128, 52.7%) were from 14 developing countries, with China contributing the most reviews (76, 31.3%). In terms of methodological quality of the studies, 30 (12.3%) were of moderate quality, 63 (25.9%) were of low quality, and 150 (61.7%) were of critically low quality. In terms of reporting quality, the median (interquartile range) PRISMA score was 14 (10-18). Regarding the topics of the reviews, 24 (9.9%) focused on the prevalence of COVID-19, 69 (28.4%) focused on the clinical manifestations, 30 (12.3%) focused on etiology, 43 (17.7%) focused on diagnosis, 65 (26.7%) focused on treatment, 104 (42.8%) focused on prognosis, and 25 (10.3%) focused on prevention. These studies mainly focused on general patients with COVID-19 (161, 66.3%), followed by children (22, 9.1%) and pregnant patients (18, 7.4%).ConclusionThis study systematically evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews of COVID-19, summarizing and analyzing trends in their clinical topics, author countries, and study populations.
| S-EPMC8313077 | biostudies-literature