Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/45676
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.creatorMazhar, Faizan-
dc.creatorHadi, Muhammad Abdul-
dc.creatorKow, Chia Siang-
dc.creatorMarran, Albaraa Mohammed N.-
dc.creatorMerchant, Hamid A.-
dc.creatorHasan, Syed Shahzad-
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-30T18:39:59Z-
dc.date.available2020-11-30T18:39:59Z-
dc.date.issued2020-12-
dc.identifier.citationMAZHAR, F. et al. Use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19: how good is the quality of randomized controlled trials? International Journal of Infectious Diseases, [S.l.], v. 101, p. 107-120, Dec. 2020.pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122032186Xpt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/45676-
dc.description.abstractObjectives We critically evaluated the quality of evidence and quality of harm reporting in clinical trials that evaluated the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) or chloroquine (CQ) for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Study design and setting Scientific databases were systematically searched to identify relevant trials of HCQ/CQ for the treatment of COVID-19 published up to 10 September 2020. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomized trials and non-randomized trials of interventions were used to assess risk of bias in the included studies. A 10-item Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) harm extension was used to assess quality of harm reporting in the included trials. Results Sixteen trials, including fourteen randomized trials and two non-randomized trials, met the inclusion criteria. The results from the included trials were conflicting and lacked effect estimates adjusted for baseline disease severity or comorbidities in many cases, and most of the trials recruited a fairly small cohort of patients. None of the clinical trials met the CONSORT criteria in full for reporting harm data in clinical trials. None of the 16 trials had an overall ‘low’ risk of bias, while four of the trials had a ‘high’, ‘critical’, or ‘serious’ risk of bias. Biases observed in these trials arise from the randomization process, potential deviation from intended interventions, outcome measurements, selective reporting, confounding, participant selection, and/or classification of interventions. Conclusion In general, the quality of currently available evidence for the effectiveness of CQ/HCQ in patients with COVID-19 is suboptimal. The importance of a properly designed and reported clinical trial cannot be overemphasized amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and its dismissal could lead to poorer clinical and policy decisions, resulting in wastage of already stretched invaluable health care resources.pt_BR
dc.languageen_USpt_BR
dc.publisherElsevierpt_BR
dc.rightsrestrictAccesspt_BR
dc.sourceInternational Journal of Infectious Diseasespt_BR
dc.subjectCOVID-19pt_BR
dc.subjectHarm reportingpt_BR
dc.subjectAdverse eventspt_BR
dc.subjectHydroxychloroquinept_BR
dc.subjectChloroquinept_BR
dc.titleUse of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19: how good is the quality of randomized controlled trials?pt_BR
dc.typeArtigopt_BR
Aparece nas coleções:FCS - Artigos sobre Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Arquivos associados a este item:
Não existem arquivos associados a este item.


Os itens no repositório estão protegidos por copyright, com todos os direitos reservados, salvo quando é indicado o contrário.