Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
How the clinical research community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the COVID-19 clinical studies in ClinicalTrials.gov
Zhe He; Arslan Erdengasileng; Xiao Luo; Aiwen Xing; Neil Charness; Jiang Bian.
Afiliação
  • Zhe He; Florida State University
  • Arslan Erdengasileng; Florida State University
  • Xiao Luo; Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis
  • Aiwen Xing; Florida State University
  • Neil Charness; Florida State University
  • Jiang Bian; University of Florida
Preprint em En | PREPRINT-MEDRXIV | ID: ppmedrxiv-20195552
Artigo de periódico
Um artigo publicado em periódico científico está disponível e provavelmente é baseado neste preprint, por meio do reconhecimento de similaridade realizado por uma máquina. A confirmação humana ainda está pendente.
Ver artigo de periódico
ABSTRACT
ObjectiveThe novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), broke out in December 2019, is a global pandemic. Rapidly in the past few months, a large number of clinical studies have been initiated worldwide to find effective therapeutics, vaccines, and preventive strategies. In this study, we aim to understand the landscape of COVID-19 clinical research and identify the gaps and issues that may cause difficulty in recruitment and the lack of population representativeness. Materials and MethodsWe analyzed 2,034 COVID-19 studies registered in the largest public registry - ClinicalTrials.gov. Leveraging natural language processing, descriptive analysis, association analysis, and clustering analysis, we characterized COVID-19 clinical studies by phase and design features. Particularly, we analyzed their eligibility criteria to understand (1) whether they considered the reported underlying health conditions that may lead to severe illnesses, and (2) if these studies excluded older adults, either explicitly or implicitly, which may reduce the generalizability of these studies in older adults. ResultsThe 5 most frequently tested drugs are Hydroxychloroquine (N=148), Azithromycin (N=46), Tocilizumab (N=29), Lopinavir (N=20), and Ritonavir (N=20). Most trials did not have an upper age limit and did not exclude patients with common chronic conditions such as hypertension and diabetes that are prevalent in older adults. However, known risk factors that may lead to severe illnesses have not been adequately considered by existing studies. ConclusionsA careful examination of the registered COVID-19 clinical studies can identify the research gaps and inform future COVID-19 trial design towards balanced internal validity and generalizability.
Licença
cc_by_nc_nd
Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 09-preprints Base de dados: PREPRINT-MEDRXIV Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Rct Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Preprint
Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 09-preprints Base de dados: PREPRINT-MEDRXIV Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Rct Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Preprint