Obesity as an independent risk factor for COVID-19 severity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, the world has struggled with the COVID-19 pandemic. Even after the introduction of various vaccines, this disease still takes a considerable toll. In order to improve the optimal allocation of resources and communication of prognosis, healthcare providers and patients need an accurate understanding of factors (such as obesity) that are associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes from the COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate obesity as an independent prognostic factor for COVID-19 severity and mortality among adult patients in whom infection with the COVID-19 virus is confirmed. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, two COVID-19 reference collections, and four Chinese biomedical databases were searched up to April 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included case-control, case-series, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and secondary analyses of randomised controlled trials if they evaluated associations between obesity and COVID-19 adverse outcomes including mortality, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospitalisation, severe COVID, and COVID pneumonia. Given our interest in ascertaining the independent association between obesity and these outcomes, we selected studies that adjusted for at least one factor other than obesity. Studies were evaluated for inclusion by two independent reviewers working in duplicate.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using standardised data extraction forms, we extracted relevant information from the included studies. When appropriate, we pooled the estimates of association across studies with the use of random-effects meta-analyses. The Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool provided the platform for assessing the risk of bias across each included study. In our main comparison, we conducted meta-analyses for each obesity class separately. We also meta-analysed unclassified obesity and obesity as a continuous variable (5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (body mass index)). We used the GRADE framework to rate our certainty in the importance of the association observed between obesity and each outcome. As obesity is closely associated with other comorbidities, we decided to prespecify the minimum adjustment set of variables including age, sex, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease for subgroup analysis.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 171 studies, 149 of which were included in meta-analyses.  As compared to 'normal' BMI (18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2) or patients without obesity, those with obesity classes I (BMI 30 to 35 kg/m2), and II (BMI 35 to 40 kg/m2) were not at increased odds for mortality (Class I: odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.16, high certainty (15 studies, 335,209 participants); Class II: OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.36, high certainty (11 studies, 317,925 participants)). However, those with class III obesity (BMI 40 kg/m2 and above) may be at increased odds for mortality (Class III: OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.00, low certainty, (19 studies, 354,967 participants)) compared to normal BMI or patients without obesity. For mechanical ventilation, we observed increasing odds with higher classes of obesity in comparison to normal BMI or patients without obesity (class I: OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.59, 10 studies, 187,895 participants, moderate certainty; class II: OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.96, 6 studies, 171,149 participants, high certainty; class III: OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.97, 12 studies, 174,520 participants, high certainty). However, we did not observe a dose-response relationship across increasing obesity classifications for ICU admission and hospitalisation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that obesity is an important independent prognostic factor in the setting of COVID-19. Consideration of obesity may inform the optimal management and allocation of limited resources in the care of COVID-19 patients.

Multi-center, single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing functional electrical stimulation therapy to conventional therapy in incomplete tetraplegia.

Background: Loss of upper extremity function after tetraplegia results in significant disability. Emerging evidence from pilot studies suggests that functional electrical stimulation (FES) therapy may enhance recovery of upper extremity function after tetraplegia. The aim of this trial was to determine the effectiveness of FES therapy delivered by the Myndmove stimulator in people with tetraplegia. Methods: A multi-center, single-blind, parallel-group, two-arm, randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing FES to conventional therapy in adults (≥18 years) with C4-C7 traumatic incomplete tetraplegia between 4 and 96 months post-injury, and with a baseline spinal cord injury independence measure III -self-care (SCIM III-SC) score of ≤10. Participants were enrolled at four SCI-specialized neurorehabilitation centers in the U.S. and Canada. Participants were stratified by center and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 40 sessions of FES or conventional therapy targeting upper extremities over a 14-week period. Blinded assessors measured SCIM III, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Hand Function Test, and Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension at baseline, after 20th session, after 40th session or 14 weeks after 1st session, and at 24 weeks after 1st session. The primary outcome measure was change in SCIM III-SC from baseline to end of the treatment. Based on the primary outcome measure, a sample size of 60 was calculated. Seventeen participants' progress in the study was interrupted due to the COVID-19 lockdown. The protocol was modified for these participants to allow them to complete the study. Results: Between June 2019 to August 2021, 51 participants were randomized to FES (n = 27) and conventional therapy (n = 24). Both groups gained a mean of 2 points in SCIM-SC scores at the end of treatment, which was a clinically meaningful change. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups on any outcomes. Conclusion: Forty sessions of FES therapy delivered by the MyndMove stimulator are as effective as conventional therapy in producing meaningful functional improvements that persist after therapy is completed. Limitations of this study include the impact of COVID-19 limiting the ability to recruit the target sample size and per-protocol execution of the study in one-third of the participants. Registration: This trial is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03439319.

Exploring the COVID-19 Pandemic's Impact on the Health Technology Assessment Process of the National Commission for the Incorporation of Technologies Into the Brazilian Health System.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Brazilian health technology assessment processes based on public reports from the National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (CONITEC). METHODS: This descriptive study analyzed CONITEC's official reports on Brazil available on its website between 2018 and 2021 that aimed to propose recommendations for technologies to be incorporated into its public healthcare system. We used descriptive statistics covering the number of technologies and number of reports about drugs per year, objective, type of technology, demanding sector, and outcome before 2018 to 2019 and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Furthermore, we used logistic regression to explore any association between the final decision labeled as "incorporated" and the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 278 reports were analyzed. Approximately 85% (136 of 278), 79% (220 of 278), and 45% of the reports (125 of 278) were about drugs, for incorporation, and requested by the government, respectively. Moreover, 74 of 130 (57%) and 56 of 148 decisions (38%) were "incorporated" before and during the pandemic, respectively. No significant association was noted between incorporated decisions and the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic for all technologies (odds ratio 1.43; 95% CI 0.84-2.46; P = .192) and for drugs (odds ratio 1.43; 95% confidence interval 0.81-2.53; P = .223) while adjusting for the type of technology and demandant. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought many challenges, but it does not seem to have had a significant impact on the health technology assessment approval decisions of CONITEC in Brazil.

COVID-19 retracted publications on retraction watch: A systematic survey of their pre-prints and citations.

Background: Studies related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were frequently published as pre-prints prior to undergoing peer-review. However, several publications were later retracted due to ethical concerns or study misconduct. Although these studies have been retracted, the availability of their corresponding pre-prints has never been formally investigated, and may result in the spread of misinformation if they are being used to inform decision-making. Methods: Our objective was to conduct a systematic survey of retracted COVID-19 publications listed on the Retraction Watch database as of August 15th, 2021. We assessed the availability of corresponding pre-prints for retracted publications, and documented the number of citations and online views. Results: Our study included 140 retracted COVID-19 publications, and we could not retrieve corresponding pre-prints for 132 retracted publications in our study (94%). Although we were unable to find the majority of pre-prints, they had already been disseminated, with a maximal citation count of 593 and Altmetric score of 558,928. Conclusion: While it is reassuring that most corresponding pre-prints could not be retrieved, our study highlights the need for online platforms and journals to employ quality assurance methods to prevent the spread of misinformation through citation of retracted papers.

Oral Fluvoxamine With Inhaled Budesonide for Treatment of Early-Onset COVID-19 : A Randomized Platform Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous trials have demonstrated the effects of fluvoxamine alone and inhaled budesonide alone for prevention of disease progression among outpatients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of fluvoxamine and inhaled budesonide would increase treatment effects in a highly vaccinated population. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive platform trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04727424). SETTING: 12 clinical sites in Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and a known risk factor for progression to severe disease. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to either fluvoxamine (100 mg twice daily for 10 days) plus inhaled budesonide (800 mcg twice daily for 10 days) or matching placebos. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was a composite of emergency setting retention for COVID-19 for more than 6 hours, hospitalization, and/or suspected complications due to clinical progression of COVID-19 within 28 days of randomization. Secondary outcomes included health care attendance (defined as hospitalization for any cause or emergency department visit lasting >6 hours), time to hospitalization, mortality, patient-reported outcomes, and adverse drug reactions. RESULTS: Randomization occurred from 15 January to 6 July 2022. A total of 738 participants were allocated to oral fluvoxamine plus inhaled budesonide, and 738 received placebo. The proportion of patients observed in an emergency setting for COVID-19 for more than 6 hours or hospitalized due to COVID-19 was lower in the treatment group than the placebo group (1.8% [95% credible interval {CrI}, 1.1% to 3.0%] vs. 3.7% [95% CrI, 2.5% to 5.3%]; relative risk, 0.50 [95% CrI, 0.25 to 0.92]), with a probability of superiority of 98.7%. No relative effects were found between groups for any of the secondary outcomes. More adverse events occurred in the intervention group than the placebo group, but no important differences between the groups were detected. LIMITATION: Low event rate overall, consistent with contemporary trials in vaccinated populations. CONCLUSION: Treatment with oral fluvoxamine plus inhaled budesonide among high-risk outpatients with early COVID-19 reduced the incidence of severe disease requiring advanced care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Latona Foundation, FastGrants, and Rainwater Charitable Foundation.

Early Treatment with Pegylated Interferon Lambda for Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda in preventing clinical events among outpatients with acute symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, adaptive platform trial involving predominantly vaccinated adults with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Brazil and Canada. Outpatients who presented with an acute clinical condition consistent with Covid-19 within 7 days after the onset of symptoms received either pegylated interferon lambda (single subcutaneous injection, 180 µg) or placebo (single injection or oral). The primary composite outcome was hospitalization (or transfer to a tertiary hospital) or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) due to Covid-19 within 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 933 patients were assigned to receive pegylated interferon lambda (2 were subsequently excluded owing to protocol deviations) and 1018 were assigned to receive placebo. Overall, 83% of the patients had been vaccinated, and during the trial, multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants had emerged. A total of 25 of 931 patients (2.7%) in the interferon group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 57 of 1018 (5.6%) in the placebo group, a difference of 51% (relative risk, 0.49; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.30 to 0.76; posterior probability of superiority to placebo, >99.9%). Results were generally consistent in analyses of secondary outcomes, including time to hospitalization for Covid-19 (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.33 to 0.95) and Covid-19-related hospitalization or death (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.35 to 0.97). The effects were consistent across dominant variants and independent of vaccination status. Among patients with a high viral load at baseline, those who received pegylated interferon lambda had lower viral loads by day 7 than those who received placebo. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among predominantly vaccinated outpatients with Covid-19, the incidence of hospitalization or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) was significantly lower among those who received a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda than among those who received placebo. (Funded by FastGrants and others; TOGETHER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04727424.).

An exploratory analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric type 1 diabetes mellitus patient outcomes: A single-center study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial shifts in pediatric diabetes care delivery to virtual and hybrid models. It is unclear if these changes in care delivery impacted short-term patient outcomes. Objectives: We aimed to explore glycemic control and other diabetes-related outcomes in children living with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary pediatric academic center in Canada. Subjects: Patients <18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of T1DM for at least one year were included. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review. We compared data from two years pre-pandemic (March 15, 2018-March 14, 2020) to the first year of the pandemic (March 15, 2020-March 14, 2021). The data assessed included glycemic control [Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)], diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), hospital attendance and hospitalizations, hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis was used to model potential factors affecting the HbA1c and diabetes-related morbidities. Multiple imputations were conducted as a sensitivity analysis. Results: There were 346 eligible patients included in the study. The HbA1c remained stable during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase (MD-0.14, 95% CI, -0.28, 0.01; p = 0.058). The pandemic saw an increase in the number of newly diagnosed patients (X2 = 16.52, p < 0.001) and a higher number of newly diagnosed patients presenting in DKA (X2 = 12.94, p < 0.001). In patients with established diabetes, there was an increase in hyperglycemia (OR1.38, 95% CI, 1.12,1.71; p = 0.003) and reduced DKA (OR 0.30, 95% CI, 0.12,0.73; p = 0.009) during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase. Stable rates of hospitalization (OR0.57, 95% CI, 0.31,1.04, p = 0.068) and hypoglycemia (OR1.11, 95% CI, 0.83,1.49; p = 0.484) were noted. These results were retained in the sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: Glycemic control in children with T1DM remained stable during the first year of the pandemic. There were more newly diagnosed patients during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase, and more of these new patients presented in DKA. The latter presentation was reduced in those with established diabetes during the same period.Further studies are needed to assess the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on T1DM care pathways and outcomes to allow children, families, and diabetes teams to personalize choices of care models.

Impact Of The COVID-19 Pandemic In The Brazilian National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (Conitec) Recommendation Process

IntroductionHealth Technology Assessment (HTA) Process assists decision-making in health policies. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a high demand on protocol or guideline updates and incorporation of new drugs or therapies, overwhelming local agencies. A recent study reported that major HTA bodies in England, Scotland, Germany, and Canada reduced their number of drug recommendations in 2020, due to reprioritization of resources and COVID-related challenges. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic at the Brazilian National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (Conitec) recommendation process.MethodsThis descriptive study evaluated all official recommendation reports available on the Government website in 2020 and 2021, extracting the data of disease category, technology type, the aim of the report, Public Involvement, and final result for the recommendation. The results were presented in tabular and graphical form using the machine learning, through the software R studio and excel.ResultsA total of 168 documents were evaluated, including guidelines and recommendation reports, with no reduction in the number of evaluations considering 2019. In 2020, there was a more significant evaluation of guidelines, and in 2021, a report on the non-incorporation of technologies. There were four specific documents about COVID 19, including vaccines and hospital care guidelines. The most incorporated and non-incorporated technologies were medication, targeting rare and highly prevalent diseases in balance. The Brazilian government was the main proposer. These results are part of the study "A Survey about the core methods of the recommendation reports for Brazilian Ministry of Health carried out by Brazilian Health Technology Assessment Centers”, which will characterize and analyze the core methods of the recommendation reports conducted by the Brazilian HTA Centers.ConclusionsThe pandemic had a low impact on demands in the routine of the Conitec. Establish indicators and technological norms applicable to health services, contribute to the identification of possible new practices, methods or criteria.

Multistudy Research Operations in the ICU: An Interprofessional Pandemic-Informed Approach

OBJECTIVES: Proliferation of COVID-19 research underscored the need for improved awareness among investigators, research staff and bedside clinicians of the operational details of clinical studies. The objective was to describe the genesis, goals, participation, procedures, and outcomes of two research operations committees in an academic ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Two-phase, single-center multistudy cohort. SETTING: University-affiliated ICU in Hamilton, ON, Canada. PATIENTS: Adult patients in the ICU, medical stepdown unit, or COVID-19 ward. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: An interprofessional COVID Collaborative was convened at the pandemic onset within our department, to proactively coordinate studies, help navigate multiple authentic consent encounters by different research staff, and determine which studies would be suitable for coenrollment. From March 2020 to May 2021, five non-COVID trials continued, two were paused then restarted, and five were launched. Over 15 months, 161 patients were involved in 215 trial enrollments, 110 (51.1%) of which were into a COVID treatment trial. The overall informed consent rate (proportion agreed of those eligible and approached including a priori and deferred consent models) was 83% (215/259). The informed consent rate was lower for COVID-19 trials (110/142, 77.5%) than other trials (105/117, 89.7%;p = 0.01). Patients with COVID-19 were significantly more likely to be coenrolled in two or more studies (29/77, 37.7%) compared with other patients (13/84, 15.5%;p = 0.002). Review items for each new study were collated, refined, and evolved into a modifiable checklist template to set up each study for success. The COVID Collaborative expanded to a more formal Department of Critical Care Research Operations Committee in June 2021, supporting sustainable research operations during and beyond the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Structured coordination and increased communication about research operations among diverse research stakeholders cultivated a sense of shared purpose and enhanced the integrity of clinical research operations.

An exploratory analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric type 1 diabetes mellitus patient outcomes: A single-center study

Background The COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial shifts in pediatric diabetes care delivery to virtual and hybrid models. It is unclear if these changes in care delivery impacted short-term patient outcomes. Objectives We aimed to explore glycemic control and other diabetes-related outcomes in children living with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary pediatric academic center in Canada. Subjects Patients <18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of T1DM for at least one year were included. Methods This was a retrospective chart review. We compared data from two years pre-pandemic (March 15, 2018–March 14, 2020) to the first year of the pandemic (March 15, 2020–March 14, 2021). The data assessed included glycemic control [Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)], diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), hospital attendance and hospitalizations, hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis was used to model potential factors affecting the HbA1c and diabetes-related morbidities. Multiple imputations were conducted as a sensitivity analysis. Results There were 346 eligible patients included in the study. The HbA1c remained stable during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase (MD-0.14, 95% CI, −0.28, 0.01;p = 0.058). The pandemic saw an increase in the number of newly diagnosed patients (X2 = 16.52, p < 0.001) and a higher number of newly diagnosed patients presenting in DKA (X2 = 12.94, p < 0.001). In patients with established diabetes, there was an increase in hyperglycemia (OR1.38, 95% CI, 1.12,1.71;p = 0.003) and reduced DKA (OR 0.30, 95% CI, 0.12,0.73;p = 0.009) during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase. Stable rates of hospitalization (OR0.57, 95% CI, 0.31,1.04, p = 0.068) and hypoglycemia (OR1.11, 95% CI, 0.83,1.49;p = 0.484) were noted. These results were retained in the sensitivity analysis. Conclusions Glycemic control in children with T1DM remained stable during the first year of the pandemic. There were more newly diagnosed patients during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic phase, and more of these new patients presented in DKA. The latter presentation was reduced in those with established diabetes during the same period. Further studies are needed to assess the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on T1DM care pathways and outcomes to allow children, families, and diabetes teams to personalize choices of care models.

Mobile Phone-Based Population Flow Data for the COVID-19 Outbreak in Mainland China

Background Human migration is one of the driving forces for amplifying localized infectious disease outbreaks into widespread epidemics. During the outbreak of COVID-19 in China, the travels of the population from Wuhan have furthered the spread of the virus as the period coincided with the world's largest population movement to celebrate the Chinese New Year. Methods We have collected and made public an anonymous and aggregated mobility dataset extracted from mobile phones at the national level, describing the outflows of population travel from Wuhan. We evaluated the correlation between population movements and the virus spread by the dates when the number of diagnosed cases was documented. Results From Jan 1 to Jan 22 of 2020, a total of 20.2 million movements of at-risk population occurred from Wuhan to other regions in China. A large proportion of these movements occurred within Hubei province (84.5%), and a substantial increase of travels was observed even before the beginning of the official Chinese Spring Festival Travel. The outbound flows from Wuhan before the lockdown were found strongly correlated with the number of diagnosed cases in the destination cities (log-transformed). Conclusions The regions with the highest volume of receiving at-risk populations were identified. The movements of the at-risk population were strongly associated with the virus spread. These results together with province-by-province reports have been provided to governmental authorities to aid policy decisions at both the state and provincial levels. We believe that the effort in making this data available is extremely important for COVID-19 modelling and prediction.

Multi-center, single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing functional electrical stimulation therapy to conventional therapy in incomplete tetraplegia

Background Loss of upper extremity function after tetraplegia results in significant disability. Emerging evidence from pilot studies suggests that functional electrical stimulation (FES) therapy may enhance recovery of upper extremity function after tetraplegia. The aim of this trial was to determine the effectiveness of FES therapy delivered by the Myndmove stimulator in people with tetraplegia. Methods A multi-center, single-blind, parallel-group, two-arm, randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing FES to conventional therapy in adults (≥18 years) with C4–C7 traumatic incomplete tetraplegia between 4 and 96 months post-injury, and with a baseline spinal cord injury independence measure III -self-care (SCIM III-SC) score of ≤10. Participants were enrolled at four SCI-specialized neurorehabilitation centers in the U.S. and Canada. Participants were stratified by center and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 40 sessions of FES or conventional therapy targeting upper extremities over a 14-week period. Blinded assessors measured SCIM III, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Hand Function Test, and Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension at baseline, after 20th session, after 40th session or 14 weeks after 1st session, and at 24 weeks after 1st session. The primary outcome measure was change in SCIM III-SC from baseline to end of the treatment. Based on the primary outcome measure, a sample size of 60 was calculated. Seventeen participants' progress in the study was interrupted due to the COVID-19 lockdown. The protocol was modified for these participants to allow them to complete the study. Results Between June 2019 to August 2021, 51 participants were randomized to FES (n = 27) and conventional therapy (n = 24). Both groups gained a mean of 2 points in SCIM-SC scores at the end of treatment, which was a clinically meaningful change. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups on any outcomes. Conclusion Forty sessions of FES therapy delivered by the MyndMove stimulator are as effective as conventional therapy in producing meaningful functional improvements that persist after therapy is completed. Limitations of this study include the impact of COVID-19 limiting the ability to recruit the target sample size and per-protocol execution of the study in one-third of the participants. Registration This trial is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03439319.

Prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration, defined as lasting 28 days or longer, among people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). METHODS: We analysed data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey (2 April 2021-15 October 2021) to identify people with SARDs reporting test-confirmed COVID-19. Participants reported COVID-19 severity and symptom duration, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. We reported the proportion experiencing prolonged symptom duration and investigated associations with baseline characteristics using logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 441 respondents with SARDs and COVID-19 (mean age 48.2 years, 83.7% female, 39.5% rheumatoid arthritis). The median COVID-19 symptom duration was 15 days (IQR 7, 25). Overall, 107 (24.2%) respondents had prolonged symptom duration (≥28 days); 42/429 (9.8%) reported symptoms lasting ≥90 days. Factors associated with higher odds of prolonged symptom duration included: hospitalisation for COVID-19 vs not hospitalised and mild acute symptoms (age-adjusted OR (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 3.03 to 14.1), comorbidity count (aOR 1.11 per comorbidity, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21) and osteoarthritis (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.27). COVID-19 onset in 2021 vs June 2020 or earlier was associated with lower odds of prolonged symptom duration (aOR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.81). CONCLUSION: Most people with SARDs had complete symptom resolution by day 15 after COVID-19 onset. However, about 1 in 4 experienced COVID-19 symptom duration 28 days or longer; 1 in 10 experienced symptoms 90 days or longer. Future studies are needed to investigate the possible relationships between immunomodulating medications, SARD type/flare, vaccine doses and novel viral variants with prolonged COVID-19 symptoms and other postacute sequelae of COVID-19 among people with SARDs.

Research interrupted: applying the CONSERVE 2021 Statement to a randomized trial of rehabilitation during critical illness affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches. METHODS: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures. RESULTS: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol. CONCLUSIONS: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018.

Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and recent developments on the communication of clinical trials, publishing practices, and research integrity: in conversation with Dr. David Moher.

BACKGROUND: The torrent of research during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has exposed the persistent challenges with reporting trials, open science practices, and scholarship in academia. These real-world examples provide unique learning opportunities for research methodologists and clinical epidemiologists-in-training. Dr. David Moher, a recognized expert on the science of research reporting and one of the founders of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, was a guest speaker for the 2021 Hooker Distinguished Visiting Professor Lecture series at McMaster University and shared his insights about these issues. MAIN TEXT: This paper covers a discussion on the influence of reporting guidelines on trials and issues with the use of CONSORT as a measure of quality. Dr. Moher also addresses how the overwhelming body of COVID-19 research reflects the "publish or perish" paradigm in academia and why improvement in the reporting of trials requires policy initiatives from research institutions and funding agencies. We also discuss the rise of publication bias and other questionable reporting practices. To combat this, Dr. Moher believes open science and training initiatives led by institutions can foster research integrity, including the trustworthiness of researchers, institutions, and journals, as well as counter threats posed by predatory journals. He highlights how metrics like journal impact factor and quantity of publications also harm research integrity. Dr. Moher also discussed the importance of meta-science, the study of how research is carried out, which can help to evaluate audit and feedback systems and their effect on open science practices. CONCLUSION: Dr. Moher advocates for policy to further improve the reporting of trials and health research. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed how a lack of open science practices and flawed systems incentivizing researchers to publish can harm research integrity. There is a need for a culture shift in assessing careers and "productivity" in academia, and this requires collaborative top-down and bottom-up approaches.

Effect of Awake Prone Positioning on Endotracheal Intubation in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Intervention: Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.

Perspectives on academic mentorship, research collaborations, career advice and work-life balance: a masterclass conversation with Professor Salim Abdool Karim.

Mentorship and collaboration are fundamental to ensure success in research, particularly health research. In this article, we summarise a conversation between the Master's in Biostatistics students at Stellenbosch University and Professor Salim Abdool Karim, the head of the Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa. In May 2021, Professor Abdool Karim was invited to share some of his expertise and knowledge on successful mentorship and collaboration with researchers in the early stages of their careers. Passion, hard work and always trying one's best were some of the key values he highlighted as what a young researcher would need to succeed in today's world. In this candid and open discussion, Professor Abdool Karim provides valuable insight pertaining to the intricacies of a career in research, in terms of collaboration, mentorship and personal lessons drawn from his own life experience.

Investigating and addressing the immediate and long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with substance use disorders: a scoping review and evidence map protocol

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has driven unprecedented social and economic reform in efforts to curb the impact of disease. Governments worldwide have legislated non-essential service shutdowns and adapted essential service provision in order to minimise face-to-face contact. We anticipate major consequences resulting from such policies, with marginalised populations expected to bear the greatest burden of such measures, especially those with substance use disorders (SUDs).Methods and analysisWe aim to conduct (1) a scoping review to summarise the available evidence evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with SUDs, and (2) an evidence map to visually plot and categorise the current available evidence evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on patients with SUDs to identify gaps in addressing high-risk populations.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this scoping review as we plan to review publicly available data. This is part of a multistep project, whereby we intend to use the findings generated from this review in combination with data from an ongoing prospective cohort study our team is leading, encompassing over 2000 patients with SUDs receiving medication-assisted therapy in Ontario prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.