Challenges of evidence synthesis during the 2020 COVID pandemic: a scoping review.

AIM: The objectives of this scoping review are to identify the challenges to conducting evidence synthesis during the COVID-19 pandemic and to propose some recommendations addressing the identified gaps. METHODS: A scoping review methodology was followed to map the literature published on the challenges and solutions of conducting evidence synthesis using the Joanna Briggs Methodology of performing scoping review. We searched several databases from the start of the Pandemic in December 2019 until 10th June 2021. RESULTS: A total of 28 publications was included in the review. The challenges cited in the included studies have been categorised into four distinct but interconnected themes including: upstream, Evidence synthesis, downstream and contextual challenges. These challenges have been further refined into issues with primary studies, databases, team capacity, process, resources, and context. Several proposals to improve the above challenges included: transparency in primary studies registration and reporting, establishment of online platforms that enables collaboration, data sharing and searching, the use of computable evidence and coordination of efforts at an international level. CONCLUSION: This review has highlighted the importance of including artificial intelligence, a framework for international collaboration and a sustained funding model to address many of the shortcomings and ensure we are ready for similar challenges in the future.

Editorial: Reporting Clinical Trials with Important Modifications Due to Extenuating Circumstances, Including the COVID-19 Pandemic: CONSERVE 2021.

During 2020 and 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in interruptions and cancellations of clinical trials and has delayed drug development in all areas except SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development. A further concern is the need to rapidly share anonymized datasets and improve opportunities to conduct randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in low-resource developing countries, particularly for oncology trials and for other infectious diseases. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 and the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 currently guide the reporting of trial protocols and completed RCTs, respectively. Extenuating circumstances or unavoidable situations may occur that are beyond the control of study sponsors and investigators. On June 21, 2021, the CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance (CONSERVE) was published. The scope of CONSERVE 2021 includes modifications that have substantive implications for the feasibility, ethical conduct, scientific content, and study analysis. This Editorial aims to provide the background to CONSERVE 2021 and show how these guidelines may reduce the number of clinical trials currently being paused or discontinued due to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in poorly resourced and developing countries.

Medical-VLBERT: Medical Visual Language BERT for COVID-19 CT Report Generation With Alternate Learning.

Medical imaging technologies, including computed tomography (CT) or chest X-Ray (CXR), are largely employed to facilitate the diagnosis of the COVID-19. Since manual report writing is usually too time-consuming, a more intelligent auxiliary medical system that could generate medical reports automatically and immediately is urgently needed. In this article, we propose to use the medical visual language BERT (Medical-VLBERT) model to identify the abnormality on the COVID-19 scans and generate the medical report automatically based on the detected lesion regions. To produce more accurate medical reports and minimize the visual-and-linguistic differences, this model adopts an alternate learning strategy with two procedures that are knowledge pretraining and transferring. To be more precise, the knowledge pretraining procedure is to memorize the knowledge from medical texts, while the transferring procedure is to utilize the acquired knowledge for professional medical sentences generations through observations of medical images. In practice, for automatic medical report generation on the COVID-19 cases, we constructed a dataset of 368 medical findings in Chinese and 1104 chest CT scans from The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China, and The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai, China. Besides, to alleviate the insufficiency of the COVID-19 training samples, our model was first trained on the large-scale Chinese CX-CHR dataset and then transferred to the COVID-19 CT dataset for further fine-tuning. The experimental results showed that Medical-VLBERT achieved state-of-the-art performances on terminology prediction and report generation with the Chinese COVID-19 CT dataset and the CX-CHR dataset. The Chinese COVID-19 CT dataset is available at https://covid19ct.github.io/.

Guidelines for Reporting Trial Protocols and Completed Trials Modified Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Extenuating Circumstances: The CONSERVE 2021 Statement.

Importance: Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete. Objective: As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances. Evidence: A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders. Findings: The rapid review yielded 41 673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19.

Is publication ethics becoming a casualty of Covid-19?

Public health emergencies require real-time, accurate information to guide effective and timely responses. This calls for rapid and timely publication of information to promote both its scientific validity and societal value. On the other hand, rapid publication poses a potential threat to the integrity of the information published. Inaccurate or incomplete information arises due to the difficulty in conducting rigorous studies during an ongoing emergency, and the race for the fame and prestige that come with being first. The balance between the potential risks and benefits of rapid publication can be achieved by adhering to the principles of publication ethics that promote the integrity, accuracy and value of scientific literature (1). We highlight ten potential challenges related to scientific publishing and dissemination of information during this pandemic, and the underlying principles of publication ethics that could guide us.

Understanding the COVID 19 Conundrum and Decluttering the scientific literature on COVID 19.

As COVID 19 continues to over burden the healthcare system globally, the scientists are relentlessly pursuing research and publishing copious data on relevant managements strategies for the infection. This short communication has attempted to simplify the available information on the subject in a manner that is easy to understand and implement in clinical setting. COVID 19 is not a single disease but a spectrum and should be classified based on clinical, radiological and laboratory parameters. A simple yet powerful way is to classify COVID 19 as COVIN - COVID Infection but no disease; COVIRI - COVID infection with predominant respiratory symptoms; COVIDI - COVID infection leading to an abnormal immune response and COVID S- referring to the sequalae of an acute COVID Infection. A clinical subtype specific approach may result in easier communication between healthcare providers which in turn may improve patient outcomes by providing targeted therapy.

Completeness of reporting for COVID-19 case reports, January to April 2020: a meta-epidemiologic study.

BACKGROUND: The quality of case reports, which are often the first reported evidence for a disease, may be negatively affected by a rush to publication early in a pandemic. We aimed to determine the completeness of reporting (COR) for case reports published on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed database for all single-patient case reports of confirmed COVID-19 published from Jan. 1 to Apr. 24, 2020. All included case reports were assessed for adherence to the CARE (Case Report) 31-item checklist, which was used to create a composite COR score. The primary outcome was the mean COR score assessed by 2 independent raters. Secondary outcomes included whether there was a change in overall COR score with certain publication factors (e.g., publication date) and whether there was a linear relation between COR and citation count and between COR scores and social media attention. RESULTS: Our search identified 196 studies that were published in 114 unique journals. We found that the overall mean COR score was 54.4%. No one case report included all of the 31 CARE checklist items. There was no significant correlation between COR with either citation count or social media attention. INTERPRETATION: We found that the overall COR for case reports on COVID-19 was poor. We suggest that journals adopt common case-reporting standards to improve reporting quality.

Mycopathologia 2020: Legacy and Change to Remain Relevant for Content, Creation, and Communication.

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the publishing landscape. The 'pre-peer-review' publication model is likely to become common as a lag in publishing is not acceptable in a pandemic or other time! Mycopathologia is well placed to adopt such changes with its improved editorial processes, article formats, author engagements, and published articles' access and citation. Mycopathologia had an improved journal impact factor and article downloads in 2018-2019. A limited sampling suggested a slight decrease in the total submissions in 2019 (352 articles) compared to 2018 (371 articles). However, the acceptance rate improved to 30% in 2019 from 19% in 2018. Nearly half of all submissions in 2019 were rejected before peer-review or transferred to other Springer Nature journals. The published articles were contributed from 34 different countries, with authors from China, the USA, and Brazil among the top three contributors. An enhanced editorial oversight allowed peer-reviewers to focus on fewer articles that were well-matched to their expertise, which led to lower rejection rates post-peer-review. The introduction of MycopathologiaGENOME and MycopathologiaIMAGE article types received a good reception with notable downloads and citations.

Impact of COVID-19 Outbreak through Telemedicine Implementation on Data Reporting During Oncology Clinical Trials.

Coronavirus disease outbreak has affected all aspect of clinical care including cancer clinical trials. To minimize exposure of frail cancer patients, an implementation of telemedicine was retained. The impact of this implementation on primary and secondary endpoints criteria of ongoing clinical trials was analyzed. Out of 128 oncology clinical trials, 25 (19%) had an implementation of teleconsultation. Poor data reporting induced mainly a bias on qualitative and descriptive primary endpoints than those assessing efficacy (80% vs 20%; p < 0.001). The integration of telemedicine and E-technologies in the medical practices and clinical trials must be designed and validated.