Back

COVID-19 in Children with Brain-Based Developmental Disabilities: A Rapid Review Update

Dugas, M.; Stefan, T.; Lepine, J.; Blouin, P.; Poirier, A.-A.; Carnovale, V.; Mailhot, B.; Skidmore, B.; Faust, L.; Costello, C.; Thomson, D.; Majnemer, A.; Goldowitz, D.; Miller, S. P.; LeBlanc, A.

2021-03-24 pediatrics
10.1101/2021.03.17.21253283 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveInformation regarding the impact of COVID-19 in children with brain-based disabilities, or those at risk of developing such conditions, remains scarce. The objective was to evaluate if children with brain-based disabilities are more likely to (1) develop COVID-19, (2) develop complications from the disease, and (3) to have a poorer prognosis. Study designWe conducted a rapid review using search strategies iteratively developed and tested by an experienced medical information specialist in consultation with the review team and a panel of knowledge users. Searches were initially performed on April 18th, 2021, and updated on October 31st, 2020. Four reviewers individually performed study selection using pilot-tested standardized forms. Single reviewers extracted the data using a standardized extraction form that included study characteristics, patients characteristics, and outcomes reported. ResultsWe identified 1448 publications, of which 29 were included. Studies reported data on 2288 COVID-19 positive children, including 462 with a brain-based disability, and 72 at risk of developing such disability. Overall, the included studies showed a greater risk to develop severe COVID-19 disease in children with brain-based disabilities. Although mortality is very low, the case-fatality rate appeared to be higher in children with disabilities compared to children without disabilities. ConclusionsOur review shows that children with brain-based disabilities are overrepresented in hospitalization numbers compared to children without disabilities. However, most studies included children that were hospitalized from COVID-19 in secondary and tertiary care centers. Results of this review should therefore be interpreted with caution.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.