Histopathological Findings in COVID-19 Cases: A Systematic Review
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
No abstract available
Article activity feed
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.11.20210849: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization Selection criteria: Articles were included if they met the following eligibility criteria: (1) addressed pathological reports of COVID-19 autopsies or postmortem cases, (2) involved human subjects (at least one case), (3) all study designs were involved (case report, case series, cross-sectional, case-control, randomized and non-randomized studies), (4) no language restrictions were applied. 2.3. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Sources of information: A predetermined protocol was used to perform this systematic review … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.11.20210849: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization Selection criteria: Articles were included if they met the following eligibility criteria: (1) addressed pathological reports of COVID-19 autopsies or postmortem cases, (2) involved human subjects (at least one case), (3) all study designs were involved (case report, case series, cross-sectional, case-control, randomized and non-randomized studies), (4) no language restrictions were applied. 2.3. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Sources of information: A predetermined protocol was used to perform this systematic review using the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and MedRxiv. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Google Scholarsuggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)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:(81, 86) Limitations of the study: As a part of any research, we faced many limitations while conduction the review. First, in this study, we focused on the available studies in certain databases in the first months of the pandemic, so government reports and other relevant grey literature weren’t included in this review, so publication bias is a possibility. Second, due to the scarcity of the evidence, we decided to include pre-prints. These publications have not yet undergone peer review. However, since we assessed the risk of bias of these studies, we feel that the benefits of including the data from these pre-prints in our review outweigh the risks. Third, we’ve included only 50 articles, but we can’t ignore the fact that the number of publications is increasing daily, and we might have missed the recently published ones. Fourth, missing information in some of the published articles has been a challenge. Many articles didn’t report the basic characteristics of the cases like gender, comorbidities, and clinical course of the disease.
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.
-
-