Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol
Bravo Jeria, R.; Rojas Reyes, M. X.; Franco, J. V.; Acuna, M. P.; Torres Lopez, L. A.; Rada, G. r.; COVID-19 L-OVE Working Group,
Show abstract
ObjectiveTo determine the relative impact of the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on outcomes important to patients with COVID 19. DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review. Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries, grey literature and in a centralised repository in L{middle dot}OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L{middle dot}OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L{middle dot}OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation). We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine -- as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs -- versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates. Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Adverse effects of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir when used for COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials 94%
- The incubation period of COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of observational research 93%
- Favipiravir for treating novel coronavirus (COVID-19) patients: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection triggers for acute myocardial infarction and stroke: systematic review protocol 93%
- Protocol for the systematic review of the Pneumocystis jirovecii -associated pneumonia in non-HIV immunocompromised patients 92%
- Hydroxychloroquine/Chloroquine for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Repurposing Existing Medications for Coronavirus Disease 2019: Protocol for a Rapid and Living Systematic Review 94%
- Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C infection: a protocol for a systematic review of observational studies 92%
- Evidence-Based, Cost-Effective Interventions To Suppress The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Prophylaxis for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis 95%
- The TARCiS statement: Guidance on terminology, application, and reporting of citation searching 92%
- Myocarditis and Pericarditis following COVID-19 Vaccination: Rapid Systematic Review of Incidence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Course 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Antivirals for post-exposure prophylaxis of influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis 93%
- Antivirals for treatment of severe influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 92%
- Real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against mortality, hospitalization, and in-hospital outcomes among community-dwelling, ambulatory COVID-19 patients during the BA.2.2 wave in Hong Kong: an observational study 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.