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

  1. Michèle Dugas
  2. Valérie Carnovale
  3. Andrée-Anne Poirier
  4. Benoit Mailhot
  5. Becky Skidmore
  6. Lena Faust
  7. Carrie Costello
  8. Donna Thomson
  9. Annette Majnemer
  10. Dan Goldowitz
  11. Steven P. Miller
  12. Annie LeBlanc

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

The prevalence of symptomatic COVID-19 in children remains low to date. In just a few months, COVID-19 has affected millions of people worldwide, and as of the date of this publication, the pandemic continues. Based on the current available evidence, children do not appear to be at higher risk of contracting COVID-19 than adults. However, children with neurological and neuromuscular conditions are vulnerable to the respiratory complications of other viral infections.

Objectives

To assess whether children with brain-based developmental disabilities were more likely to develop COVID-19 and have complications or poorer outcomes following infection.

Methods

We conducted a two-week rapid review on studies with primary data regarding children aged between zero and 18 years old with brain-based developmental disabilities, or who were at risk of developing such disabilities, with confirmed or suspected COVID-19. We performed our literature searches on April 18, 2020.

Results

Our search strategy identified 538 individual records, of which four were included in our review. Of the 50 COVID-19 pediatric patients reported in the included studies, a total of seven children were at risk of developing brain-based disabilities. Symptoms ranged in severity. However, generally, patients were discharged or saw improvements in their symptoms by the end of the study period. No deaths were reported.

Discussion

Our study highlights a knowledge gap regarding the impact of COVID-19 in children with brain-based developmental disabilities.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.01.20088021: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    We conducted the rapid review based on the proposed methodology guide of the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group (13).
    Cochrane Rapid Reviews
    suggested: None
    The MEDLINE strategy was peer reviewed by another senior information specialist prior to execution using the PRESS Checklist (15).
    MEDLINE
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)
    & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase Classic+Embase
    Embase
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    , PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
    PsycINFO
    suggested: (PsycINFO, RRID:SCR_014799)
    Cochrane Database
    suggested: None
    Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
    suggested: (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, RRID:SCR_006576)

    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:
    Limitations: Our rapid review has limitations. Due to our study design, screenings and data extractions were performed by single reviewers. However, we did perform pilot-testing for each review form to optimize consistency between reviewers. Further, despite our best efforts to identify all relevant studies or relevant documentation, it is possible that some were missed due to the rapid flow at which new information becomes available.

    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.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.01.20088021v1 on medRxiv