Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.30.21261372: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: Literature Search: A search was conducted of national anesthesia organization webpages. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources We originally searched MEDLINE, LitCovid, and Google for guidelines and recommendations surrounding the perioperative airway management of patients with COVID-19. MEDLINEsuggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected …SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.30.21261372: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: Literature Search: A search was conducted of national anesthesia organization webpages. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources We originally searched MEDLINE, LitCovid, and Google for guidelines and recommendations surrounding the perioperative airway management of patients with COVID-19. MEDLINEsuggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Our study has limitations. Firstly, our results provide an overview of the current literature rather than answer a single, predefined question. Secondly, the recommendations included in our scoping review were not comprehensively assessed for methodologic quality (since this is not usually conducted for scoping reviews), although we would expect that included recommendations would likely score poorly in both methodological rigour and transparency of development. Reflecting on our experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic, our study should inform future efforts to improve and streamline the pandemic response. A few central groups of critical care specialists were able to both create and organize emerging evidence and facilitate the creation of internationally applicable guidelines which could be locally modified as needed. For example, the REMAP-CAP and RECOVERY trials provided a global research platform to efficiently adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic, and rapidly evaluate various treatments in an expeditious manner.19–21 Similar international, multicentre initiatives within the perioperative research space were seldom observed, representing an important avenue of exploration to improve preparedness for future pandemics. Early synthesis and organization of evidence without redundancy in efforts will facilitate development of a judicious response to future pandemics. Our scoping review may be considered as one of the first needed steps to learn from experience. Just like individuals...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
