MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084027636 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.571156

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Treatment in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· review· en· W3084027636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenwen Cheng, Yufeng Li, Yan Cui, Ying Chen, Sharui Shan, Duan Xiao, Xiaoyun Chen, Zhuoming Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuangdong Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryMechanical ventilationMeta-analysisAdverse effectIntensive care unitInternal medicineCohort studyCorticosteroidCohortPneumoniaRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: COVID-19 is a type of pneumonia caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection that was identified in December 2019. Corticosteroid therapy was empirically used for clinical treatment in the early stage of the disease outbreak; however, data regarding its efficacy and safety are controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid therapy in patients with COVID-19. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and China Science and Technology Journal (VIP) databases were searched for studies. Data on clinical improvement, mortality, virus clearance time, adverse events (AEs), utilization of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization and hospital stay were extracted by two authors independently. Study quality was assessed by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (cohort studies). The pooled data were meta-analyzed using a random effects model, and the quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Eleven cohort studies (corticosteroid group vs control group), two retrospective cohort studies (without control group), and seven case studies were identified. A total of 2840 patients were included. Compared with the control treatments, corticosteroid therapy was associated with clinical recovery (RR=1.30, 95% CI [0.98, 1.72]) and a significantly shortened length of ICU hospitalization (RR=-6.50, 95% CI [-7.63, -5.37]), but it did not affect the mortality ((RR=1.59, 95% CI [0.69, 3.66], I2=93.5%), utilization of mechanical ventilation (RR=0.35, 95% CI [0.10, 1.18]), duration of symptoms (WMD=1.69, 95% CI [-0.24, 3.62]) or virus clearance time (RR=1.01, 95% CI [-0.91, 2.92], I2=57%) in COVID-19 patients. Treatment with corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 may cause mild adverse outcomes. The quality of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes. Conclusion: The findings of our study indicate that corticosteroid therapy is not highly effective, but it appears to improve prognosis and promote clinical recovery in patients with severe COVID-19.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207