ABSTRACT
In December 2019, an outbreak of pneumonia, which was named COVID-2019, emerged as a global health crisis. Scientists worldwide are engaged in attempts to elucidate the transmission and pathogenic mechanisms of the causative coronavirus. COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020, making it critical to track and review the state of research on COVID-19 to provide guidance for further investigations. Here, bibliometric and knowledge mapping analyses of studies on COVID-19 were performed, including more than 1,500 papers on COVID-19 available in the PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases from January 1, 2020 to March 8, 2020. In this review, we found that because of the rapid response of researchers worldwide, the number of COVID-19-related publications showed a high growth trend in the first 10 days of February; among these, the largest number of studies originated in China, the country most affected by pandemic in its early stages. Our findings revealed that the epidemic situation and data accessibility of different research teams have caused obvious difference in emphases of the publications. Besides, there was an unprecedented level of close cooperation and information sharing within the global scientific community relative to previous coronavirus research. We combed and drew the knowledge map of the SARS-CoV-2 literature, explored early status of research on etiology, pathology, epidemiology, treatment, prevention, and control, and discussed knowledge gaps that remain to be urgently addressed. Future perspectives on treatment, prevention, and control are also presented to provide fundamental references for current and future coronavirus research.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To perform meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of adding Liuwei Dihuang Pills (, LDP) to Western medicine in improving treatment outcomes for type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases, including the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched to identify eligible studies; i.e., if the study involved a randomized clinical trial in which the experimental group combined LDP with Western drugs and the control group used the corresponding Western drugs alone to treat type 2 diabetes. Outcomes were measured in terms of fasting blood glucose (FBG), postprandial blood glucose (2hPG) and HbA1c level. Efficacy was also measured by using control and response rates. The combined odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Studies included in the analysis were less adequate than expected in terms of methodological quality. A total of 1,609 patients from 18 studies were included. We found that adding LDP can lower patients' FBG (MD=0.54 mmol/L, 95% CI [0.15, 0.93], P=0.007), 2hPG (MD=1.05 mmol/L, 95% CI [0.29, 1.81], P<0.01) and HbA1c (MD=0.23, 95% CI [0.02, 0.45], P=0.008). There were also improvements in treatment response rates (OR=3.41, 95% CI [2.38, 4.90], P<0.01) and control rates (OR=2.47, 95% CI [1.91, 3.20], P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Adding LDP to Western medicine might improve treatment outcomes of diabetes, including FBG, 2hPG, response rates and control rates.