2021
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab376
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critical Review of the Scientific Evidence and Recommendations in COVID-19 Management Guidelines

Abstract: Background Little is known about the quality and potential impacts of the guidelines for COVID-19 management. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, guideline databases and specialty society Web sites to evaluate the quality of the retrieved guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II. Results … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
11
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
1
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although several meta-research studies have explored different aspects of COVID-19 research, such as volume, characteristics, and quality [ 2 , 4 , 73 , 74 ], this is the first study to our knowledge that has focused on the extent of duplication and currency among published systematic reviews of one intervention. In addition, looking at which studies were included in the reviews allowed us to contrast the utility of systematic reviews with living guidelines for informing up-to-date decisions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although several meta-research studies have explored different aspects of COVID-19 research, such as volume, characteristics, and quality [ 2 , 4 , 73 , 74 ], this is the first study to our knowledge that has focused on the extent of duplication and currency among published systematic reviews of one intervention. In addition, looking at which studies were included in the reviews allowed us to contrast the utility of systematic reviews with living guidelines for informing up-to-date decisions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…NIV may be utilized as a first-line treatment as well as a follow-up therapy after HFNC [9]. NIV showed variable success rates, from 11% in milder cases to 80% in severely ill patients [6,9,15].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The best supportive treatment for AHRF caused by COVID-19 is still unknown. In general, the current guidelines are of poor quality and widely variable [9]. There are no clear recommendations about the indications for NIRS or which individuals will need endotracheal intubation and invasive care [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the guidelines from national and international organizations several medications have been more discussed for COVID-19 treatment. For instance, plasma therapy, LPV/r, tocilizumab, remdesivir, sofosbuvir-daclatasvir, corticosteroids, IFNs, ivermectin, and anti-thrombotics are frequently discussed in guidelines [12].…”
Section: Synthetic Drugsmentioning
confidence: 99%