Scientific output on coronavirus and WHO's Solidarity Project: a science-based choice?
Galina, A. C.; Sarzi, D. S.; Medeiros, L. C. d.; Sampaio, A. L. F.; Leta, J.
Show abstract
In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Solidarity Program probably the largest global initiative to encourage and support research in four promising drugs and therapies (Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, {beta} interferon and the combination Lopinavir / Ritonavir) to reduce the mortality of COVID-19. Considering the potential impact of this project to restrain the current pandemic, the present study aims to investigate whether it was designed upon a scientific basis. For this proposal, we collected all documents on coronavirus indexed in Scopus database by using a search strategy based in MESH terms. Among the studied groups of documents, we looked in more detail the Coronavirus group in order to find documents related to WHO s drugs or to other drugs and therapies extracted from another source. The main findings indicate that the number of documents related to WHOs drugs are higher than in the other groups and this subset of documents involves a larger number of institutions and countries. Hence, the results shown in this study illustrate that decisions by an international body, as WHO, may be science-based and not be merely bureaucratic decisions.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Mapping the coevolution, leadership and financing of research on viral vectors, RNAi, CRSPR/Cas9 and other genomic editing technologies 95%
- Investigating the Nature of Open Science Practices Across Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: An Audit 94%
- Treatment Profiles And Clinical Outcomes Of COVID-19 Patients At Private Hospital In Jakarta 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature 94%
- How the COVID-19 pandemic is shaping research in Africa: inequalities in scholarly output and collaborations and new opportunities for scientific leadership 93%
- Pharmaceutical Payments to Japanese Board-Certified Infectious Disease Specialists: A Four-year Retrospective Analysis of Payments from 92 Pharmaceutical Companies between 2016 and 2019 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Health Economic Burden of COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia 91%
- Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines and Post-vaccination SARS-COV 2 Infection, Hospitalization, and Mortality: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies 91%
- The impact of armed conflict on the epidemiological situation of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Libya, Syria, and Yemen 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of Monkeypox disease knowledge and perception among the healthcare workers versus the general population during the first month of the WHO emerging infectious disease alert 91%
- Healthcare workers’ worries and Monkeypox vaccine advocacy during the first month of the WHO Monkeypox alert: Cross-sectional survey in Saudi Arabia 91%
- Utility of IL-6 in the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of COVID-19 patients: A longitudinal study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine learning prediction of antiviral-HPV protein interactions for anti-HPV pharmacotherapy 92%
- More than 50 Long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis 92%
- Meta-analysis of transcriptomes of SARS-Cov2 infected human lung epithelial cells identifies transmembrane serine proteases co-expressed with ACE2 and biological processes related to viral entry, immunity, inflammation and cellular stress. 91%
"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.