Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 7 de 7
Filtre
Ajouter des filtres

Année
Type de document
Gamme d'année
1.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.07.17.20155986

Résumé

At present, existing evidence about the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and ABO blood group polymorphism is preliminary and controversial. In this meta-analysis we investigate this association and determine SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals odds of having a specific blood group compared to controls. We performed a systematic search on MEDLINE and LitCovid databases for studies published through July 15, 2020. Seven studies met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, including a total of 13 subgroups of populations (7503 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases and 2962160 controls). We analysed the odds of having each blood group among SARS-CoV-2 positive patients compared with controls. Random-effects models were used to obtain the overall pooled odds ratio (OR). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed in order to explore the source of heterogeneity and results consistency. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals are more likely to have blood group A (pooled OR 1.23, 95%CI: 1.09-1.40) and less likely to have blood group O (pooled OR=0.77, 95%CI: 0.67-0.88). Further studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms at the basis of this association, which may affect the kinetics of the pandemic according to the blood group distribution within the population.


Sujets)
COVID-19
2.
preprints.org; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | PREPRINT-PREPRINTS.ORG | ID: ppzbmed-10.20944.preprints202006.0310.v1

Résumé

Frauds and misconducts have been common in the history of science. Recent events connected to the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted how the risks and consequences of this are no longer acceptable. Two papers, addressing the treatment of COVID-19, have been published in two of the most prestigious medical journals. In both, the authors declared to have analysed electronic records from a private corporation, which apparently collected data of tens of thousands of patients, coming from thousands of hospitals. Both papers have been retracted a few weeks later. When such events happen, the confidence of the population in scientific research is likely to be weakened. The objective of this paper is to highlight how the current system endangers not only the reliability of scientific research, but also the very foundations of the trust system on which modern healthcare is based. Having shed the light on the dangers of a system without appropriate monitoring, we propose to improve the research process using the promising aspects of the distributed ledger technology which, thanks to the characteristics of immutability, decentralization and transparency, appears among the best solutions to avoid the repetition of the mistakes linked to the recent and past history of research.


Sujets)
COVID-19
3.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.04.26.20080341

Résumé

Background. Healthcare is responding to the COVID-19 pandemic through the fast adoption of digital solutions and advanced technology tools. The aim of this study is to describe which digital solutions have been reported in the scientific literature and to investigate their potential impact in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. We conducted a literature review searching PubMed and MedrXiv with terms considered adequate to find relevant literature on the use of digital technologies in response to COVID-19. We developed an impact score to evaluate the potential impact on COVID-19 pandemic of all the digital solutions addressed in the selected papers. Results. The search identified 269 articles, of which 145 full-text articles were assessed and 124 included in the review after screening and impact evaluation. Of selected articles, most of them addressed the use of digital technologies for diagnosis, surveillance and prevention. We report that digital solutions and innovative technologies have mainly been proposed for the diagnosis of COVID-19. In particular, within the reviewed articles we identified numerous suggestions on the use of artificial-intelligence-powered tools for the diagnosis and screening of COVID-19. Digital technologies are useful also for prevention and surveillance measures, for example through contact-tracing apps or monitoring of internet searches and social media usage. Discussion. It is worth taking advantage of the push given by the crisis, and mandatory to keep track of the digital solutions proposed today to implement tomorrow's best practices and models of care, and to be ready for any new moments of emergency.


Sujets)
COVID-19
4.
preprints.org; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | PREPRINT-PREPRINTS.ORG | ID: ppzbmed-10.20944.preprints202004.0516.v1

Résumé

Objective: On March 11, 2020 the WHO declared that COVID-19 is pandemic. Among the risk factors for many infectious diseases, a role of the ABO blood group system is reported in the literature. We argue whether it is necessary to investigate the relationship between ABO blood groups and susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and if we should consider some blood groups as potential risk factors for COVID-19. Results: Based on the scientific evidence reported in this letter, we believe that further studies are needed to investigate how the ABO polymorphism influences the host susceptibility, individual response and clinical risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Sujets)
COVID-19 , Maladies transmissibles
5.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.04.15.20066183

Résumé

Background. In the early phases of a new pandemic, identifying the most relevant evidence and quantifying which studies are shared the most can help researchers and policy makers. The aim of this study is to describe and quantify the impact of early scientific production in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. The study consisted of: 1) review of the scientific literature produced in the first 30 days since the first COVID-19 paper was published; 2) analysis of papers' metrics with the construction of a Computed-Impact-Score (CIS) that represents a unifying score over heterogeneous bibliometric indicators. In this study we use metrics and alternative metrics collected into five separate categories. On top of those categories we compute the CIS. Highest CIS papers are further analyzed. Results. 239 papers have been included in the study. The mean of citations, mentions and social media interactions resulted in 1.63, 10 and 1250, respectively. The paper with highest CIS resulted "Clinical features of patients[...]" by Chaolin Huang et al., which rated first also in citations and mentions. This is the first paper describing patients affected by the new disease and reporting data that are clearly of great interest to both the scientific community and the general population. Conclusions. The early response of scientific literature during an epidemic does not follow a pre- established pattern. Being able to monitor how communications spread from the scientific world toward the general population using both traditional and alternative metric measures is essential, especially in the early stages of a pandemic.


Sujets)
COVID-19
6.
arxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | PREPRINT-ARXIV | ID: ppzbmed-2004.06179v3

Résumé

On December 31st 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology detected in Wuhan City. The cause of the syndrome was a new type of coronavirus isolated on January 7th 2020 and named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). SARS-CoV-2 is the cause of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since January 2020 an ever increasing number of scientific works have appeared in literature. Identifying relevant research outcomes at very early stages is challenging. In this work we use COVID-19 as a use-case for investigating: (i) which tools and frameworks are mostly used for early scholarly communication; (ii) to what extent altmetrics can be used to identify potential impactful research in tight (i.e. quasi-zero-day) time-windows. A literature review with rigorous eligibility criteria is performed for gathering a sample composed of scientific papers about SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 appeared in literature in the tight time-window ranging from January 15th 2020 to February 24th 2020. This sample is used for building a knowledge graph that represents the knowledge about papers and indicators formally. This knowledge graph feeds a data analysis process which is applied for experimenting with altmetrics as impact indicators. We find moderate correlation among traditional citation count, citations on social media, and mentions on news and blogs. This suggests there is a common intended meaning of the citational acts associated with aforementioned indicators. Additionally, we define a method that harmonises different indicators for providing a multi-dimensional impact indicator.


Sujets)
COVID-19 , Pneumopathie infectieuse , Syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère
7.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.03.25.20043315

Résumé

Introduction: Recent events highlight how emerging and re-emerging pathogens are becoming global challenges for public health. In December 2019, a novel coronavirus has emerged. This has suddenly turned out into global health concern. Objectives: Aim of this research is to focus on the bibliometric aspects in order to measure what is published in the first 30-days of a global epidemic outbreak Methods: We searched PubMed database in order to find all relevant studies in the first 30-days from the first publication. Results: From the initial 442 identified articles, 234 were read in-extenso. The majority of papers come from China, UK and USA. 63.7% of the papers were commentaries, editorials and reported data and only 17.5% of the sources used data directly collected on the field. Topics mainly addressed were epidemiology, preparedness and generic discussion. NNR showed a reduction for both the objectives assessed from January to February. Conclusions: Diagnosis and effective preventive and therapeutic measures were the fields in which more research is still needed. The vast majority of scientific literature in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak is based on reported data rather than primary data. Nevertheless, the scientific statements and public health decisions rely on these data.

SÉLECTION CITATIONS
Détails de la recherche