COVID-19 Living Overview of Evidence repository is highly comprehensive and can be used as a single source for COVID-19 studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 Living OVerview of Evidence (COVID-19 L·OVE) is a public repository and classification platform for COVID-19 articles. The repository contains more than 430,000 articles as of September 20, 2021 and intends to provide a one-stop shop for COVID-19 evidence. Considering that systematic reviews conduct high-quality searches, this study assesses the comprehensiveness and currency of the repository against the total number of studies in a representative sample of COVID-19 systematic reviews. METHODS: Our sample was generated from all the studies included in the systematic reviews of COVID-19 published during April 2021. We estimated the comprehensiveness of COVID-19 L·OVE repository by determining how many of the individual studies in the sample were included in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository. We estimated the currency as the percentage of studies that was available in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository at the time the systematic reviews conducted their own search. RESULTS: We identified 83 eligible systematic reviews that included 2,132 studies. COVID-19 L·OVE had an overall comprehensiveness of 99.67% (2,125/2,132). The overall currency of the repository, that is, the proportion of articles that would have been obtained if the search of the reviews was conducted in COVID-19 L·OVE instead of searching the original sources, was 96.48% (2,057/2,132). Both the comprehensiveness and the currency were 100% for randomized trials (82/82). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 L·OVE repository is highly comprehensive and current. Using this repository instead of traditional manual searches in multiple databases can save a great amount of work to people conducting systematic reviews and would improve the comprehensiveness and timeliness of evidence syntheses. This tool is particularly important for supporting living evidence synthesis processes.

Breathing Patterns and Oxygenation Saturation During Sleep in Children Habitually Living at High Altitude in the Andes: A Systematic Review.

Background: Human respiratory physiology changes significantly in high altitude settings and these changes are particularly marked during sleep. It is estimated that 170 million people live above 2,500 m in environments where normal sleep parameters differ from those established at sea level or low altitude. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of publications reporting sleep studies in healthy children living at high altitude. For this purpose, data from PubMed, EMBASE, SciELO and Epistemomikos bases were retrieved up to August 2021. Results: Six articles met specified inclusion criteria; all reporting data were from South America involving 245 children (404 sleep studies) in children aged 0.6 months to 18 years, at altitudes between 2,560 to 3,775 m. The main results were: (1) Central apnea index decreased as the age increased. (2) The obstructive apnea/hypopnea index showed a bimodal profile with an increase in young infants up to age of 4 months, decreasing to 15 months of age, and then a second peak in children aged 4 to 9 years of age, dropping in older schoolchildren and adolescents. (3) Periodic breathing in the first months of life is more marked with increasing altitude and decreases with age. Conclusions: There are few studies of sleep physiology in children living at high altitude. The international parameters defining normal apnea indices currently used at low altitude cannot be applied to high altitude settings. The interpretation of sleep studies in children living at high altitude is complex because there are important developmental changes across childhood and a wide range of altitude locations. More normative data are required to determine thresholds for respiratory pathology at a variety of high altitude settings.