International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) Global Support Centre, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2021 May 18;16(5):e0251250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251250. eCollection 2021.
Clinical characterisation studies have been essential in helping inform research, diagnosis and clinical management efforts, particularly early in a pandemic. This systematic review summarises the early literature on clinical characteristics of patients admitted to hospital, and evaluates the quality of evidence produced during the initial stages of the pandemic.
MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health databases were searched for studies published from January 1st 2020 to April 28th 2020. Studies which reported on at least 100 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 of any age were included. Data on clinical characteristics were independently extracted by two review authors. Study design specific critical appraisal tools were used to evaluate included studies: the Newcastle Ottawa scale for cohort and cross sectional studies, Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series and the Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.
The search yielded 78 studies presenting data on 77,443 people. Most studies (82%) were conducted in China. No studies included patients from low- and middle-income countries. The overall quality of included studies was low to moderate, and the majority of studies did not include a control group. Fever and cough were the most commonly reported symptoms early in the pandemic. Laboratory and imaging findings were diverse with lymphocytopenia and ground glass opacities the most common findings respectively. Clinical data in children and vulnerable populations were limited.
The early Covid-19 literature had moderate to high risk of bias and presented several methodological issues. Early clinical characterisation studies should aim to include different at-risk populations, including patients in non-hospital settings. Pandemic preparedness requires collection tools to ensure observational studies are methodologically robust and will help produce high-quality data early on in the pandemic to guide clinical practice and public health policy.
Available at https://osf.io/mpafn.
临床特征研究对于帮助研究、诊断和临床管理工作具有重要意义,尤其是在大流行早期。本系统综述总结了有关住院患者临床特征的早期文献,并评估了大流行初期产生的证据质量。
检索了 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 4 月 28 日期间发表的 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和全球卫生数据库中的研究。纳入了至少报告 100 例任何年龄的新冠病毒病住院患者的研究。两名综述作者独立提取临床特征数据。使用特定的研究设计评价工具评估纳入的研究:针对队列和横断面研究的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表、针对病例系列研究的 Joanna Briggs 研究所清单以及评估随机试验偏倚风险的 Cochrane 协作工具。
检索结果显示了 78 项研究,共纳入了 77443 人。大多数研究(82%)在中国进行。没有研究纳入来自低收入和中等收入国家的患者。纳入研究的整体质量为低到中度,且大多数研究未纳入对照组。发热和咳嗽是大流行早期最常见的症状。实验室和影像学表现多样,最常见的表现分别为淋巴细胞减少症和磨玻璃影。儿童和弱势群体的临床数据有限。
早期的新冠病毒病文献存在中高度偏倚风险,且存在若干方法学问题。早期临床特征研究应旨在纳入不同的高危人群,包括非住院环境中的患者。大流行防范需要采集工具,以确保观察性研究具有方法学稳健性,并有助于在大流行早期产生高质量数据,以指导临床实践和公共卫生政策。
可在 https://osf.io/mpafn 上获取。