Evidence about clinical management

Evidence syntheses on this webpage are organized by:

  1. prophylaxis for COVID-19 (drugs used to prevent severe COVID-19 infection organized by molecule)
  2. clinical treatment of COVID-19 (prognostic factors, drugs organized by broad type and within that by molecule, blood products, ventilation, other aspects of critical care, treatment of sequelae, community-based treatment, and complementary and alternative therapies)
  3. clinical management of pandemic-related impacts on health more generally (interrupted management of other conditions, routine management considerations for other conditions, burn-out and trauma in essential health workers, mental health and addiction issues, and reproductive care)
  4. health promotion more generally

For drugs, we rely primarily on the three ‘best’ living evidence syntheses covering the safety and efficacy of all drug types (rather than syntheses covering single molecules):

  1. BMJ | McMaster (which also maintains a separate living evidence synthesis about prophylaxis for COVID-19)
  2. COVID-NMA
  3. Copenhagen Trials Unit (The LIVING Project)

We include additional living evidence syntheses, such as the one maintained by the Pan American Health Organization, when they address molecules not covered by these living evidence syntheses.

We continue to add evidence syntheses to this webpage as we harvest and process weekly updates from ‘high-yield, high quality’ sources of evidence syntheses and as we add new sources. More details are available about the context for the inventory, our approach to developing and maintain it, and tips for using it. Similar webpages are available for evidence about public-health measures, health-system arrangements, and economic and social responses.

.
Broad and specific decisions Criteria for 'best evidence synthesis' Details to support relevance assessmentAdditional decision-relevant details Citation
Date of last search Quality (AMSTAR) rating Evidence-certainty (e.g., GRADE) assessment availableKey findings
Living evidence synthesis             Type of synthesis             Type of question
Prophylaxis for COVID-19
        
 Drugs to prevent severe COVID-19 infection 2021-01-20 10/11Yes[All drugs] No molecules studied in large clinical trials have demostrated benefits as a prophylactic treatment for COVID-19Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsBartoszko JJ, Siemieniuk RAC, Kum E, Qasim A, Zeraatkar D, Ge L, et al. Prophylaxis for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021;
  2020-09-218/10No[Chloroquine] No evidence has been found on the effects of chloroquine as a prophylactic treatment to prevent COVID-19Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHernandez AV, Roman YM, Pasupuleti V, Barboza JJ, White CM. Update alert 3: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of COVID-19. Annals of Internal Medicine 2020:L20-1257.
  2021-01-20
10/11
Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Adding prophylactic hydroxychloroquine to standard care does not have an important effect on mortality and hospitalization, and probably increases adverse events Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Bartoszko JJ, Siemieniuk RAC, Kum E, Qasim A, Zeraatkar D, Ge L, et al. Prophylaxis for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021; 
  2021-04-1310/11Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Using hydroxychloroquine as a prophylaxis strategy probably slightly reduces secondary COVID-19 cases, it may not have an effect on hospitalizations, and probably increases the risk of adverse eventsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsPreventative treatments: Hydroxychloroquine vs placebo. COVID NMA; 2020.
  2020-09-218/10No[Hydroxychloroquine] No evidence has been found on the effects of chloroquine as a prophylactic treatment to prevent COVID-19Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHernandez AV, Roman YM, Pasupuleti V, Barboza JJ, White CM. Update alert 3: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of COVID-19. Annals of Internal Medicine 2020:L20-1257.
  2021-01-20
10/11
Yes[Ivermectin] The effects of using ivermectin as a prophylactic treatment for COVID-19 are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms Bartoszko JJ, Siemieniuk RAC, Kum E, Qasim A, Zeraatkar D, Ge L, et al. Prophylaxis for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021; 
  2021-01-20
10/11
Yes[Ivermectin + iota-carrageenan] The effects of using ivermectin with iota-carrageenan as a prophylactic treatment for COVID-19 are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsBartoszko JJ, Siemieniuk RAC, Kum E, Qasim A, Zeraatkar D, Ge L, et al. Prophylaxis for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021;
  2021-04-138/9Yes[Ivermectin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs Standard care. COVID-NMA. 2021;
Clinical treatment of COVID-19         
 Assessing most important prognostic factors 
2020-10-27
4/10No While age is the most important prognostic factor for estimating the likelihood of hospitalization, severe disease or death among COVID-19 patients, being male, obese and having co-morbidities are also important Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Other Norwegian Institute of Public Health. COVID-19 and risk factors for severe disease – A rapid review, 3rd update. Oslo: Norwegian Institute of Public Health; 2020 
 
2020-04-28
7/10YesMany clinical and socioeconomic factors provide prognostic information on mortality or severe disease in patients with COVID-19
No (but see protocol in next row by same authors)Full reviewOtherIzcovich A, Ragusa M, Tortosa F, Marzio M, Agnoletti C, Bengolea A, et al. Prognostic Factors for Severity and Mortality in Patients Infected with COVID-19: A Systematic Review. The Lancet 2020. 
  N/A (protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review evaluating the prognostic factors for severity and mortality among COVID-19 patients is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-01-11) Protocol Other Izcovich A, Ragusa M, Sanguine V, Tortosa F, Espinosa F, Agnoletti C, Marzio AL, Bengolea A, Saavedra E, Catalano HN, Rada G. Prognostic factors for the severity and mortality in patients infected with COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol. MedRxiv 2020. 
  2020-05-01
8/11 No For COVID-19 patients in ICU, having co-morbidities (such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, acute kidney injury), suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome associated with invasive mechanical ventilation, and some lab indicators are significant predictors of poor prognosis No Full review Other Chang R, Elhusseiny KM, Yeh Y, Sun W. COVID-19 ICU and mechanical ventilation patient characteristics and outcomes - A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv 2020. 
  2020-07-27
8/11 No Several comorbidities, being older, and having dyspnoea are among the strongest predictors of in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patientsNo Full review OtherMesas AE, Cavero-Redondo I, Álvarez-Bueno C, Sarriá Cabrera MA, de Andrade SM, Sequí-Dominguez I, et al. Predictors of in-hospital COVID-19 mortality: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis exploring differences by age, sex and health conditions. PLoS One. 2020;15(11):e0241742. 
  N/A (protocol)
n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review assessing the clinical features risk factures and outcomes of COVID-19 in infants, children and adolescents is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-01-11) Protocol Other Neal E, Russell F, Curtis N, Uahwatanasakul W, Watson B, Overmars I. COVID-19 in infants, children and adolescents: a living systematic review on clinical features, risk factors and outcomes. PROSPERO. 2020;CRD42020212228. 
  2020-04-09
8/11 No Evidence shows that COVID-19 case-fatality ratios appear to differ across different countries and regions [Review of studies of variable quality and substantial heterogeneity]NoFull review Other Yong C, Pearleen E, Urvish SS, Hao G, Koh J, Somani J, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of non-severe and severe pediatric and adult covid-19 patients across different geographical regions: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. The Lancet. 2020.  
  2020-06-10
8/11 NoBeing male, a smoker or 60 years of age or older were factors associated with the highest risk of in-hospital death [Review of studies with high heterogeneity for some outcomes]No Full review Other Xiang G, Xie L, Chen Z, Hao S, Fu C, Wu Q, et al. Clinical risk factors for mortality of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Palliative Medicine. 2021.  
  2020-07-31
8/11 No After adjusting for confounders, diabetes was found to be the best predictor of a worse COVID-19 related outcome, and its effects were independent of gender or age [Review of studies of unknown quality and substantial heterogeneity] No Full review Other Corona G, Pizzocaro A, Vena W, Rastrelli G, Semeraro F, Isidori AM, et al. Diabetes is most important cause for mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders. 2021.  
 Screening and testing for COVID-19         
  See public-health measures        
 Drugs to treat COVID-19        
  All drugs2021-02-1210/11YesWhile the effectiveness of several drugs for COVID-19 remain uncertain due to important study limitations, the best-available evidence suggests that corticosteroids probably reduce mechanical ventilation and mortality among severe patients, remdesivir may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation, but it may not have an impact on mortality, interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation and length of stay, and JAK inhibitors may reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation and length of stay
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsSiemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2020-11-02
10/11Yes The effect of most drugs for COVID-19 is currently uncertain, except that remdesivir does not reduce mortality, hydroxychloroquine probably slightly increase mortality and serious adverse events, an that lopinavir/ritonavir probably does not affect mortality, and mechanical ventilation
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Juul S, Nielsen EE, Feinberg J, Siddiqui F, Joergensen CK, Barot E, et al. Interventions for treatment of COVID-19: Second edition of a living systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses (The LIVING Project). PLoS One. 2021;16(3):e0248132.
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aYes [Protocol - results not yet available] A network meta-analysis on the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)ProtocolBenefits and harms De Crescenzo F, Amato L, Vecchi S, D'Alo' G, Cruciani F, Mitrova Z, Saulle R, Addis A, Davoli M. Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions for COVID-19: a Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020176914. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A network meta-analysis on the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)ProtocolBenefits and harms da Rocha A, Pinto A. A Rapid Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis on the Pharmacological Interventions for Coronavirus Disease 2019. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020179818. 
  Anti-virals2021-04-13
8/9 Yes [Azvudine] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Azvudine vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Baloxavir marboxil] The effects of adding baloxavir marboxil to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Baloxavir Marboxil vs standard care. 2020. 
  
2021-04-1310/11No [Baloxavir marboxil vs favipiravir] The effects of baloxavir marboxil compared with favipravir are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Baloxavir Marboxil. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11No[Baloxavir marboxil vs lopinavir + ritonavir] The effects of baloxavir marboxil compared with lopinavir + ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat + umifenovir + interferon-a are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Baloxavir Marboxil vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir or Darunavir/Cobicistat + Umifenovir + Interferon-a. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 No [Darunavir/cobicistat] The effects of adding darunavir/cobicistat to standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Darunavir/Cobicistat vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Favipiravir] Adding favipiravir to standard care may increase viral negative conversion and may make little or no difference in clinical improvement. The effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Favipiravir early vs late] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir early vs Favipiravir late. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11No [Favipiravir vs lopinavir + ritonavir] The effects of favipriavir compared with lopinavir + ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat + umifenovir + interferon-a are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir or Darunavir/Cobicistat + Umifenovir + Interferon-a. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Favipiravir vs tocilizumab] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Tocilizumab. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Favipiravir + Inferferon β-1b vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir+interferon beta-1b vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Favipiravir + tocilizumab vs tocilizumab] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Tocilizumab vs Favipiravir+Tocilizumab. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Favipiravir vs umifenovir] The benefits of favipiravir compared with umifenovir are uncertain while it may reduce adverse eventsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes[Favipiravir + interferon beta-1b vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir+interferon beta-1b vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Lopinavir + ritonavir may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-1310/11No [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Adding lopinavir + ritonavir to novaferon and standard care in moderate or severely ill people may increase the viral negative conversion but effects for other outcomes are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon + Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Novaferon. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Adding lopinavir + ritonavir to standard care make little or no difference on mortality, may not have an effect on the incidence of clinical improvement or the disease progression, whereas it may not increase adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Standard Care. 2020.
   Not specified8/9 Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Adding lopinavir + ritonavir to standard care may reduce mortality slightly but the evidence is uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Epistemonikos Foundation. Systematic Review: Preliminary Report: Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19. Santiago, Chile: 2020.
   Not specified
9/11 Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Adding lopinavir + ritonavir to the standard care may reduce mortality and the risk of requiring mechanical ventilation and may reduce serious adverse events. Any absolute reduction in mortality likely varies across different risk groups but may be less than 1% in low and medium risk populations, and about 5% in a high risk population  Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsVerdugo-Paiva F, Izcovich A, Ragusa M, Rada G. Lopinavir-ritonavir for COVID-19: A living systematic review. Lopinavir-ritonavir para COVID-19: una revisión sistemática viva. Medwave. 2020;20(6):e7967. Published 2020 Jul 15. doi:10.5867/medwave.2020.06.7966 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir vs ribavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Ribavirin+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir + rivabirin + interferon alpha vs rivabirin + interferon alpha] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ribavirin+Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Ribavirin+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs umifenovir] Umifenovir may reduce adverse events compared with lopinavir + ritonavir, and its effects on other clinical outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11No[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs novaferon] The effects of lopinavir + ritinoavir compared to novaferon are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Novaferon vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Remdesivir] The effects of remdesivir on mortality are uncertain, but it may reduce risk of mechanical ventilationYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Remdesivir] Remdesivir reduces severe disease progression at 28 days, probably slightly reduce mortality and it may increase clinical improvement, whereas it does not increase the incidence of serious adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Remdesivir vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2020-08-31
7/10 Yes[Remdesivir] Remdesivir may reduce mortality and probably improves recovery and reduce adverse events in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsWilt TJ, Kaka AS, MacDonald R, Greer N, Obley A, Duan-Porter W. Remdesivir for adults with COVID-19 : A living systematic review for an American college of physicians practice points. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2020.  
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Remdesivir] Using remdesivir for five days compared to 10 days may increase disease progression, and increase the frequency of serious adverse eventsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Remdesivir 5 days vs Remdesivir 10 days. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11
Yes
[Ribavirin + interferon-b-1b] The effects of adding ribavarin and interferon-b-1b to liponavir + ritonavir are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir + Ribavirin + Interferon-b-1b vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Ribavirin + lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon alpha vs lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon alpha] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Ribavirin+Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Sofosbuvir + daclatasvir + ribavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Sofosbuvir + Daclatasvir + Ribavirin vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir] The effects of adding sofosbuvir/daclatasvir to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir vs standard care. 2020. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Protocol- results not yet available] A review evaluating the efficacy of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir in COVID-19 management is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-03-14) Protocol Benefits and harms Nafea A, Altaweel A, Mahmoud A, Elanany I, Altaweel A. Efficacy of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir in COVID-19 management: a living systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021;CRD42021232934. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes[Triazavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Triazavirin vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Umifenovir] The effects of adding umifenovir to standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Umifenovir vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Umifenovir vs favipiravir] See comparison under favipiravir vs umifenovir
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Umifenovir vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under lopinavir + ritonavir vs umifenovirYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2020-07-05
5/9 No A systematic review on the cost-effectiveness of antiviral treatments for pandemics found no articles on COVID-19, but modelling studies showed that antivirals may be a cost-effective strategy either as a single intervention or as part of a multifaceted strategyNo Full review Costs and cost-effectiveness Dawoud DM & Soliman KY. Cost-effectiveness of antiviral treatments for pandemics and outbreaks of respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19: A systematic review of published economic evaluations. Value in Health. 2020;23(11):1409-1422. 
  Other antimicrobials
2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Azithromycin] Azithromycin may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-138/9No [Azithromycin] Synthesis pending
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Non-randomized Studies: Azithromycin vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Azithromycin vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Azithromycin] Adding azithromycin to hydroxychloroquine therapy may make little or no difference with respect to disease progression, and may increase the risk of adverse events, with the effects on other outcomes uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Azithromycin vs lincomycin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Lincomycin vs Azithromycin. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine] Azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine may increase adverse events, and its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Standard care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Chloroquine] The effects of adding chloroquine to the standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Chloroquine vs Standard Care. 2020.
   Not specified
9/10Yes[Chloroquine] Adding chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to standard care in hospitalized patients may not increase the SARS-CoV-2 clearance, whereas it may increase serious adverse events, although due to very low certainty evidence the benefits of and harms of this comparison cannot be fully evaluated
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Epistemonikos Foundation. Systematic Review: Preliminary Report: Antimalarials for the Treatment of COVID-19. Santiago, Chile: 2020.
   2020-09-21
8/10 No [Chloroquine] It is unlikely that in-hospital use of chloroquine would have beneficial effects
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Hernandez AV, Roman YM, Pasupuleti V, Barboza JJ, White CM. Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review. Ann Intern Med. 2020;10.7326/M20-2496. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Chloroquine vs hydroxychloroquine] The effects of hydroxychloroquine compared to chloroquine are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs Chloroquine. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Doxycycline + ivermectin vs ivermectin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Ivermectine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes[Doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Doxycycline + ivermectin] The effects of adding doxycycline + ivermectin to standard care are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 No [Hydroxychloroquine] Hydroxychloroquine slightly increases mortality at 14-28 days, probably makes little or no difference in the incidence of clinical improvement and disease progression, and it may increase serious adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-02-1210/11 Yes [Hydroxychloroquine] Hydroxychloroquine may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Hydroxychloroquine vs favipiravir + interferon beta-1b] See comparison under antivirals/favipiravir + interferon beta-1b vs hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir+interferon beta-1b vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Hydroxychloroquine vs febuxostat] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Febuxostat vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Hydroxychloroquine vs azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin vs hydroxychloroquine Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs Azithromycin. 2020.
   2020-07-19
9/11 No [Hydroxychloroquine][hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin] No benefits were associated with the use of hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin for COVID-19 patients, but the frequency of adverse effects was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group [Review mainly based on observational studies]Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Benefits and harms Shamshirian A, Hessami A, Heydari K, Alizadeh-Navaei R, Ebrahimzadeh M, Yip G, et al. Hydroxychloroquine Versus COVID-19: A Periodic Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. MedRxiv 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Standard care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin vs Ivermectin + doxycycline] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020. 
   Not specified9/10Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Adding hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to standard care in hospitalized patients may not increase the SARS-CoV-2 clearance, whereas it may increase serious adverse events,  although due to very low certainty evidence the benefits of and harms of this comparison cannot be fully evaluatedYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsEpistemonikos Foundation. Systematic Review: Preliminary Report: Antimalarials for the Treatment of COVID-19. Santiago, Chile: 2020.
   2020-09-218/10No[Hydroxychloroquine] It is unlikely that in-hospital use of hydroxychloroquine would have beneficial effectsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHernandez AV, Roman YM, Pasupuleti V, Barboza JJ, White CM. Update alert 3: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of COVID-19. Annals of Internal Medicine 2020:L20-1257.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Itraconazole] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Itraconazole vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Ivermectin] Adding ivermectin to standard care probably has no effect on clinical improvement, and it does not increase the risk of adverse events. The effects on other outcomes are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Ivermectin] The effects of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Ivermectin + doxycycline] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectinYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Ivermectin + doxycycline vs hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020.
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Ivermectin] [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the effectiveness of ivermerctin is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07) Protocol Benefits and harms Ortiz-Muñoz L, Rada G. Ivermectin for COVID-19: a Living Systematic Review Protocol. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020189554. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes[Lincomycin vs azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin vs lincomycinYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lincomycin vs Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Nitazoxanide] In patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, nitazoxanide probably slightly increase clinical improvement but its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Nitazoxanide vs placebo. 2020. 
  Anti-inflammatories
2021-04-137/9 Yes [Colchicine] Adding colchicine to standard care may reduce disease progression and it probably increases the risk of adverse events. The effects on other outcomes are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Colchicine vs Standard Care. 2020. 
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Colchicine] Colchicine may reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation, and duration of hospitalization in non-severe patients, but its effects are uncertain for hospitalized patients Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Trefoil factor 2(TFF2) + interferon kappa(IFN-k)] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. IFN-κ plus TFF2 vs standard care. 2020. 
   N/A (Protocol) n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs  is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)Protocol Benefits and harms Urrea G, Meza N, Vargas M, Ortiz L, Rada G, Madrid E. Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Patients with COVID-19: a Living Systematic Review Protocol. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020179594. 
  Kinase inhibitors 2020-07-30
8/11 No [Baricitinib] JAK-inhibitors (including baricitinib) may be associated with decreased mortality, fewer ICU admissions, and shorter length of stay in COVID-19 patients [Review of observational studies]No Full review Benefits and harms Walz L, Cohen AJ, Rebaza AP, Vanchieri J, Slade MD, Dela Cruz CS, et al. Janus kinase-inhibitor and Type I interferon ability to produce favorable clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020. 
   2021-04-13
8/9 Yes [Baricitinib + remdesivir vs remdesivir] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Baricitinib+Remdesivir vs Remdesivir. 2020. 
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Baricitinib] JAK inhibitors may reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation and duration of hospitalization, and they probably reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2020-07-30
8/11 No [Ruxolitinib] JAK-inhibitors (including ruxolitinib) may be associated with decreased mortality, fewer ICU admissions, and shorter length of stay in COVID-19 patients [Review of observational studies] No Full review Benefits and harms Walz L, Cohen AJ, Rebaza AP, Vanchieri J, Slade MD, Dela Cruz CS, et al. Janus kinase-inhibitor and Type I interferon ability to produce favorable clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [CIGB-325] The effects of using CIGB-325 are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. CIGB-325 vs standard care. 2020. 
  
2021-04-1310/11Yes[Ruxolitinib vs vitamin C] The effects of ruxolitinib compared with vitamin C are uncertain, although further research is warranted since one very small study appeared to demonstrate a benefit for ruxolitinib for the outcomes of mortality and clinical improvement
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ruxolitinib vs Vitamin C. 2020. 
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Ruxolitinib] JAK inhibitors may reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation and duration of hospitalization, and they probably reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
  Corticosteroids  2020-06-23
5/9Yes [Dexamethasone] One large trial showed that dexamethasone reduced mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, while the reduction might be greatest for ventilated patients
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Benefits and harms Helfand M, Wilt TJ, Hilgart J, Arkhipova-Jenkins I, Obley, AJ. Rapid Response: Corticosteroid Therapy for COVID-19 Infection. Washington, DC: Evidence Synthesis Program, Health Services Research and Development Service, Office of Research and Development, Department of Veterans Affairs. VA ESP Project #09-199; 2020 
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Corticosteroids] Adding corticosteroids to standard care slightly reduces mortality and disease progression and may not increase severe adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Corticosteroids vs Standard Care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Glucocorticoids] Glucocorticoids probably reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation, and probably increase ventilator-free days in hypoxic hospitalized COVID-19 patients, whereas its effects on non-severe patients remain uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-138/9 No [Methylprednisolone] Synthesis pending
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Non-randomized Studies: Methylprednisolone vs Standard Care. 2020. 
  Biologics2020-06-20
10/11Yes [Anakinra] The effects of using anakinra are uncertain No Full review Benefits and harms Kim M, An M, Kim W, Hwang T. Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacological Interventions for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Confounder-Adjusted 20212 Hospitalized Patients. MedRxiv 2020. 
   2020-07-01
7/11 No [Anakinra] One systematic review including several immunomodulatory agents concluded that anakinra is one of only two immunomodulatory agents (the other being tocilizumab) that decrease mortality and reduce COVID-19 clinical symptoms No Full review Benefits and harms Talaie H, Hosseini SM, Nazari M, et al. Is there any potential management against COVID-19? A systematic review and meta-analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Aug 18]. Daru. 2020;1-13. doi:10.1007/s40199-020-00367-4 
   2021-01-07
9/11 Yes [Anakinra] The effects of anakinra for COVID-19 patients are uncertain NoFull review Benefits and harms Khan F, Stewart I, Fabbri L, Moss S, Robinson K, Smyth AR, et al. A systematic review of Anakinra, Sarilumab, Siltuximab with meta-analysis of Tocilizumab for Covid-19. medRxiv. 2020.  
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Bamlanivimab] Bamlanivimab may make little or no difference in the mortality and clinical improvement, and it may not increase the risk of serious adverse eventsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. LY-CoV555 vs Placebo. 2020. 
   2021-04-13
10/11 Yes [Bacille Calmette-Guérin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. BCG vs standard care. 2020. 
  
2021-04-1310/11Yes [Inferferon β-1a] The evidence for adding interferon β-1a to standard care is of very low certainty therefore the relative effects are uncertain, however, one small study showed substantial benefit for disease progression and mortality suggesting further studies are warrantedYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Interferon β vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-13
8/9 Yes [Interferon β-1a (nebulized)] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Inhaled nebulised interferon beta-1a vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Interferon β-1b + rivabirin] See comparison under anti-virals/ribavirin +interferon-b-1b + lopinavir + ritonavir vs lopinavir + ritonavir
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir + Ribavirin + Interferon-b-1b vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020. 
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Interferon β-1b] Interferon β-1b may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome

Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)

Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Interferon β-1b + favipiravir vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under anti-virals/favipiravir + interferon beta-1b vs hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir+interferon beta-1b vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Interferon gamma] The effects of adding interferon gamma to a interferon α-2b  therapy are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Interferon α-2b + Interferon gamma+ vs Interferon α-2b. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Interferon kappa(IFN-k) + trefoil factor 2(TFF2)] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. IFN-κ plus TFF2 vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Itolizumab] The effects of adding itolizumab to standard care are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Itolizumab vs standard care. 2020. 
   2020-07-01
7/11 No [Meplazumab] One systematic review comparing several immunomodulatory agents for managing COVID-19 infection concluded that meplazumab is probably not  beneficial No Full review Benefits and harms Talaie H, Hosseini SM, Nazari M, et al. Is there any potential management against COVID-19? A systematic review and meta-analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Aug 18]. Daru. 2020;1-13. doi:10.1007/s40199-020-00367-4 
   2021-04-1310/11No[Novaferon] The effects of adding novaferon to lopinavir + ritonavir are uncertain although one small study found a benefit for novaferon and lopinavir +ritonavir for increasing viral clearance
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon + Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11No[Novaferon vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir vs novaferon
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes[Peginterferon lambda-1] It is uncertain whether there are any beneficial outcomes for using peginterferon lamda-1 for mild COVID-19, but it uses are probably associated with an increase in adverse eventsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Peginterferon Lambda-1 vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Recombinant super-compound interferon(RSIFN-co)] The effects of RSIFN-co compared to IFN-alpha are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. rSIFN-co vs IFN-alpha. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Antibody cocktail REGN-COV2] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. REGN-COV2 vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Sarilumab] Adding sarilumab to standard care may make little or no difference in mortality and may slightly increase adverse events in severe/critical COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Sarilumab vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-01-07 9/11Yes [Sarilumab] The effects of sarilumab for COVID-19 patients are uncertainNo Full review Benefits and harms Khan F, Stewart I, Fabbri L, Moss S, Robinson K, Smyth AR, et al. A systematic review of Anakinra, Sarilumab, Siltuximab with meta-analysis of Tocilizumab for Covid-19. medRxiv. 2020.  
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Sarilumab] Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation and may reduce hospitalization length in hypoxic hospitalized COVID-19 patients, while it may have some benefits on mortality Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2021-02-26
9/11 Yes [Sarilumab] Compared to standard care, sarilumab may make little or no difference in mortality, and time to clinical improvement, while probably does not increase adverse events in severe and critical patients Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Ghosn L, Chaimani A, Evrenoglou T,  Davidson M, Graña C, Schmucker C, et al. Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: A living systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2021.  
   2021-01-07
9/11Yes [Siltuximab] The effects of siltuximab for COVID-19 patients are uncertainNoFull review Benefits and harms Khan F, Stewart I, Fabbri L, Moss S, Robinson K, Smyth AR, et al. A systematic review of Anakinra, Sarilumab, Siltuximab with meta-analysis of Tocilizumab for Covid-19. medRxiv. 2020.  
   2021-02-12
10/11Yes [Tocilizumab] Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation and may reduce hospitalization length in hypoxic hospitalized COVID-19 patients, while it may have some benefits on mortalityYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980. 
   2021-04-1310/11 No [Tocilizumab] Tocilizumab slightly reduces mortality and probably slightly increases the incidence of clinical improvement, whereas it probably does not increase serious adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Tocilizumab vs Standard care/Placebo. 2021.
   2020-10-08 10/11 Yes [Tocilizumab] Tocilizumab probably reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients while its effects on mortality are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Tleyjeh IM, Kashour Z, Damlaj M, Riaz M, Tlayjeh H, Altannir M, et al. Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2020:S1198-743X(20)30690-X.  
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Tocilizumab + favirpiravir vs favipiravir] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harmsCOVID NMA.Favipiravir vs favipiravir+tocilizumab. 2020. 
   2021-04-13 8/9Yes [Tocilizumab vs favipiravir] See comparison under anti-virals/favipiravir vs tocilizumabYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Tocilizumab. 2020.
   2021-02-26
9/11 Yes [Tocilizumab] Compared to standard care, tocilizumab slightly reduces 28-day mortality, may not have an effect on 60-day mortality, probably may slightly increase clinical improvement and it probably does not increase serious adverse events Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Ghosn L, Chaimani A, Evrenoglou T,  Davidson M, Graña C, Schmucker C, et al. Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: A living systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2021.  
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Vilobelimab] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. IFX-1 vs standard care. 2020.
  Others2021-04-1310/11Yes [a-Lipoic acid] It is uncertain whether a-Lipoic acid has any differential effects compared with placebo due to very low certainty evidence
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harmsCOVID NMA. a-Lipoic Acid vs Placebo. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Aprepitant] The effects of adding aprepitant to dexamethasone therapy are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Aprepitant+Dexamethasone vs Dexamethasone. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Auxora] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Auxora vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Bromhexine] The effects of bromhexine are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Bromhexine vs standard care. 2020.
   2020-04-23
5/5 Yes [Cell-based therapies] No evidence was found on the effects of cell-based therapies for COVID-19
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Rada G, Corbalan J, Rojas P. Cell-Based Therapies for COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review. MedRxiv 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Colony-stimulating factor] Adding recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to standard care may reduce mortality and increase adverse events Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [C1 esterase inhibitor] The effects of adding C1 esterase/kallikrein inhibitor to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [C1 esterase inhibitor vs icatibant] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Enoxaparin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Therapeutic enoxaparin vs prophylactic anticoagulant. 2020. 
   2020-09-208/11Yes [Famotidine] The effects of famotidine for COVID-19 patients are uncertain
NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsSethia R, Prasad M, Jagannath S, Nischal N, Soneja M, Garg P, et al. Efficacy of Famotidine for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Febuxostat vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under other antimicrobials/hydroxychloroquine vs febuxostatYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Febuxostat vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Fluvoxamine] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Fluvoxamine vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Icatibant] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Icatibant vs C1 esterase inhibitor] See comparison under C1 esterase inhibitor vs icatibantYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9Yes[Leflunomide + interferon alpha2a vs interferon alpha2a] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Leflunomide + Interferon alpha2a vs Interferon alpha2a. 2020.
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Metabolic cofactor] The effects of combined metabolic cofactor supplementation are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Combined metabolic cofactor supplementation vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Neutral electrolyzed saline] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Neutral electrolyzed saline vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-13
10/11Yes [Oxygen-ozone] The effects of adding oxygen-ozone therapy to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Oxygen-ozone vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-13
8/9Yes [Pentoxifylline] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Pentoxifylline vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Progesterone] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Progesterone vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Prolectin-M] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Prolectin-M vs standard care. 2020.
   2020-07-27
7/10 No [Statins] Statins have shown to reduce fatal or severe disease in COVID-19 patients [Review of observational studies of unclear quality]No Full review Benefits and harms Kow CS & Hasan SS. Meta-analysis of effect of statins in patients with COVID-19. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2020.  
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Stem cells] Using human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell infusion may reduce mortality and not increase adverse events, but the effects on other outcomes are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell infusion vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Sulodexide] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Sulodexide vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Telmisartan] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Telmisartan vs standard care. 2020.
   2020-04-295/6Yes[Vitamin C] No evidence was found addressing the benefits and harms of vitamin C for the treatment of COVID-19Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsBaladia E, Pizarro AB, Ortiz-Munoz L, Rada G, COVID-19 LOVE Working Group. Vitamin C for COVID-19: A living systematic review. Medwave 2020;20(6):e7978
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Vitamin C] The effects of using vitamin C are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Vitamin C vs standard of care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11 Yes [Vitamin C] Vitamin C may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2021-04-1310/11Yes [Vitamin D] The effects of using vitamin D are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Vitamin D vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-02-12
10/11Yes[Vitamin D] Vitamin D may not reduce mortality or have an effect in other patient clinical outcome Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Siemieniuk R, Bartoszko  JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich  A, Kum E, et al. Update to living systematic review on drug treatments for covid-19. BMJ. 2021;370:m2980.  
   2021-04-1310/11 Yes [Zinc] The effects of adding zinc to hydroxychloroquine therapy are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020.
 Blood products
        
  Convalescent plasma
2021-04-1310/11Yes Adding convalescent plasma to standard care may slightly reduce mortality and disease progression but probably increases serious adverse events
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Convalescent Plasma vs Standard Care. 2020. 
   2020-08-198/10Yes The effects of convalescent plasma for patients with COVID-19 are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Piechotta V, Chai KL, Valk SJ, Doree C, Monsef I, Wood EM, et al. Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 10; 
   2020-11-01
5/9 No The uses of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients with immunodeficiency have been limited, but some anecdotal evidence shows positive results, especially for patients with agammaglobulinemia [Review of observational studies of unknown quality] No  Full review Other Senefeld JW, Klassen SA, Ford SK, Wiggins CC, Bostrom BC, Thompson MA, et al. Therapeutic use of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients with immunodeficiency: A systematic review. medRxiv. 2020.
   2020-11-01
7/10 No Insufficient evidence was found regarding the use of convalescent plasma for pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 No Full review Other Zaffanello M, Piacentini G, Nosetti L, Franchini M. The use of convalescent plasma for pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2: A systematic literature review. Transfusion and Apheresis Science. 2020.  
   2021-04-138/9Yes [Convalescent plasma vs fresh frozen plasma] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Convalescent plasma vs fresh frozen plasma. 2020. 
   2021-04-1310/11Yes The effects of using early vs. deferred convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Early convalescent plasma vs deferred convalescent plasma. 2020. 
  Hyperimmune immunoglobulin
2021-04-1310/11NoThe effects of immunoglobulin compared to standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Non-randomized Studies: Intravenous Immunoglobulin vs Standard Care. 2020. 
   2020-08-19
8/10YesThe effects of hyperimmune immunoglobulin for patients with COVID-19 are uncertain
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewBenefits and harmsPiechotta V, Chai KL, Valk SJ, Doree C, Monsef I, Wood EM, et al. Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 10; 
 Ventilation for COVID-19         
  Invasive ventilation 
2020-05-01
7/10 Yes A systematic reviews including studies of patients with COVID-19, MERS and SARS, showed that the effects of non invasive ventilation, compared to invasive mechanical ventilation are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Schünemann HJ, Khabsa J, Solo K, Khamis AM, Brignardello-Petersen R, El-Harakeh A, et al. Ventilation techniques and risk for transmission of coronavirus disease, including COVID-19: A living systematic review of multiple streams of evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2020;173(3):204-216. 
   2020-04-23
6/10 No A small number of studies suggests that the mortality of COVID-19 patients under invasive mechanical ventilation is very high, but details of how varying ventilatory protocols and management strategies influence clinical outcomes remains uncertain
No Full reviewOtherAlmeshari MA, Alobaidi NY, Asmri MA, Alhuthail E, Alshehri Z, Alenezi F, et al. Mechanical ventilation utilization in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020. 
   2020-05-01
8/11 No Although significant geographical variations exists, pooled analyses suggest a 43% mortality rate among patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19  No Full review Other Chang R, Elhusseiny KM, Yeh Y, Sun W. COVID-19 ICU and mechanical ventilation patient characteristics and outcomes - A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv 2020. 
   2020-05-15
7/9 Yes It is uncertain whether a higher or lower oxygen target is more beneficial for COVID-19 patients under invasive mechanical ventilation or in an intensive care unitNo Rapid review Benefits and harms Cumpstey AF, Oldman AH, Smith AF, Martin D, Grocott MP. Oxygen targets in the intensive care unit during mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: A rapid review. Cochrane Database Systematic Review. 2020;9:CD013708. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Thermal helium-oxygen mixture] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Thermal helium-oxygen mixture vs standard care. 2020. 
   2020-07-08
9/11 No The case fatality rate for COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation varied greatly but the mean was 45% increasing markedly in older patients  [Review of studies of unclear quality]No Full review Other Lim ZJ, Subramaniam A, Reddy MP, Blecher G, Kadam U, Afroz A, et al. Case fatality rates for COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2020.  
   2020-09-27
8/11 No Around half of patients requiring tracheotomy have been successfully weaned off of mechanical ventilation, while over one third of tracheotomized patients have undergone succesful decannulation [Review of observational studies of variable quality and with substantial heterogeneity in results]No Full review Other Benito DA, Bestourous DE, Tong JY, Pasick LJ, Sataloff RT. Tracheotomy in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of weaning, decannulation, and survival. Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2021.  
  Non-invasive ventilation2020-05-01
7/10 Yes A systematic review including studies of patients with COVID-19, MERS and SARS showed that non-invasive ventilation, compared with no mechanical ventilation, may reduce mortality, but may increase the risk of COVID-19 transmission to healthcare workers Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms Schünemann HJ, Khabsa J, Solo K, Khamis AM, Brignardello-Petersen R, El-Harakeh A, et al. Ventilation techniques and risk for transmission of coronavirus disease, including COVID-19: A living systematic review of multiple streams of evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2020;173(3):204-216. 
   2020-05-14
9/10 YesAlthough no studies were found for COVID-19 patients, indirect evidence shows that high-flow nasal cannual may reduce the need for invasive ventilation, and probably has little or no difference in mortality and length of stayNoRapid reviewBenefits and harmsAgarwal A, Basmaji J, Muttalib F, et al. High-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19: systematic reviews of effectiveness and its risks of aerosolization, dispersion, and infection transmission [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 15]. Les canules nasales à haut débit pour le traitement de l’insuffisance respiratoire hypoxémique aiguë chez les patients atteints de la COVID-19: comptes rendus systématiques de l’efficacité et des risques d’aérosolisation, de dispersion et de transmission de l’infection [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 15]. Can J Anaesth. 2020;1-32. doi:10.1007/s12630-020-01740-2
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review exploring the safety and efficacy of high-flow cannulae, continuous positive pressure, non-invasive mechanical ventilation by face mask, low-cost ventilators and ventilator spacers compared with conventional invasive mechanical ventilation treatment for the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome due to viral pneumonia is currently being conductedNo Protocol Benefits and harms Carreno HL, Prieto SA, Gaitan Alfonso JA, Abondano D, Cardenas YR, Yepe JJ. Alternatives to Invasive Mechanical Ventilation for
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome due to Viral Pneumonia: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2020. 
  Proning 2020-07-055/10NoAwake prone positioning is a feasible option for patients with COVID-19, and can improve oxygenation and respiratory symptoms with little discomfort for the majority of patients [Review of observational studies]
NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsMch SA, Baishya M, Singh A, Khanna P. Effect of awake prone positioning in COVID-19 patients- A systematic review. Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care. 2020.
   2020-07-23
8/11 No Although important heterogeneity was found among studies (given the unstandardized processes for proning), prone position of adults non-intubated patients showed a significant improvement in oxygenation parameters and respiratory rate No Full review Other Mallikarjuna PR, Ashwin S, Zheng Jie LIM, Alexander Z,  Afsana A, B. Baki B, et al. Prone positioning of non-intubated patients with COVID-19 - A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020.  
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the effectiveness of awake prone positioning in preventing the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19 breathing spontaneously is currently being conductedNo Protocol Benefits and harms Rodrigues L, Frutuoso J. Prone position in patients with spontaneous ventilation and a COVID-19 diagnosis. PROSPERO. 2020;CRD42020208934. 
   2020-08-15
8/11 No Awake prone positioning in non-intubated patients has not been compared directly to non-prone positioning in randomized trials, but studies that examined awake prone positioning tended to have higher oxygenation but not lower mortality or intubation than studies that examined non-prone positioning [Review of observational studies with substantial heterogeneity]No Full review Benefits and harms Pavlov I, He H, McNicholas B, Perez Y, Tavernier E, Trump MW, et al. Awake prone positioning in non-intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2021. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the effects of prone versus supine ventilation in COVID-19 patients is currently being conducted No Protocol Benefits and harms Chua EX, Abosamak MF, Zahir SMISM, Teoh WY. Effect of prone versus supine ventilation in COVID patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021234050 
 Other aspects of critical care for COVID-19         
  Management of cardiovascular complications2020-04-30
9/10No The risk of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized COVID-19 patients ranges from 4.4 to 8.2%, with a substantial increase among ICU patients [Review of observational studies]No Full review Other Fontana P, Casini A, Robert-Ebadi H, Glauser F, Righini M, Blondon M. Venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: Systematic review of reported risks and current guidelines. Swiss Medical Weekly. 2020;150:w20301.
   2020-05-08 8/11NoSubstantial heterogeneity was found among studies assessing the risk of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with a greater risk in critical patients, and with some results indicating that patients under pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis reported a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism [Review of observational studies]
NoFull reviewOtherZhang C, Shen L, Le KJ, Pan M-M, Kong L-C, Gu Z-C, et al. Incidence of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2020;7:151. 
   2020-06-2010/11YesThe effects of using anticoagulants in people hospitalized with COVID-19 are currently uncertain, and may increase major bleeding events, compared to patients receiving no treatment
NoRapid reviewBenefits and harmsFlumignan RLG, Tinôco JD, Pascoal PIF, Areias LL, Cossi MS, Fernandes MICD, et al. Prophylactic anticoagulants for people hospitalised with COVID‐19. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020;10:Art. No.: CD013739. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013739.
   2020-06-2010/11YesProphylactic doses of anticoagulants in people hospitalized with COVID-19 may reduce mortality but increase major bleeding events, compared to patients receiving anticoagulants as therapeutic dose
NoRapid reviewBenefits and harmsFlumignan RLG, Tinôco JD, Pascoal PIF, Areias LL, Cossi MS, Fernandes MICD, et al. Prophylactic anticoagulants for people hospitalised with COVID‐19. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020;10:Art. No.: CD013739. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013739.
   2020-08-26
9/11 No The prevalence of venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is high, with ICU patients at increased riskNo Full review Other Nopp S, Moik F, Jilma B, Pabinger I, Ay C. Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Research and Practice in Thrombosis and haemostasis. 2020. 
   Not specified7/11NoAn important incidence of cardiac arrhythmias was found among COVID-19 patients, although substantial heterogeneity among studies was reported [Review of observational studies]
NoFull reviewOtherHamam O, Goda A, Eldalal M, Ussama A, Elmandouh O, Fahmy M, et al. Cardiac arrhythmias in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020. 
   2020-07-15
7/11 No Cardiac injury was observed in 23% of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and seems to be more common among patients older than 60 and people with severe disease [Review of studies of unknown quality]No Full review Other Fu L, Liu X, Su Y, Ma J, Hong K. Prevalence and impact of cardiac injury on COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Cardiology. 2020.  
   2020-08-018/11 No Among COVID-19 patients requiring admission to an ICU, vasopressor support was required in more than two-thirds of the cases [Review of observational studies of variable quality] No Full review OtherTan E, Song J, Deane AM, Plummer MP. Global impact of COVID-19 infection requiring admission to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2020. 
   2020-08-01
6/11 No The incidence of COVID-19-related myocardial injury has been estimated to range from 16.1% to 23.8% and was higher in men, older people and people with comorbidities [Review of studies of unknown quality and substantial heterogeneity]No Full review Other Prasitlumkum N, Chokesuwattanaskul R, Thongprayoon C, Bathini T, Vallabhajosyula S, Cheungpasitporn W. Incidence of myocardial injury in COVID-19-infected patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diseases. 2020;8(4):E40. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review exploring risk factors for the development of new onset cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 is currently being conductedNo Protocol Other Ryan B, Kirk M, Boland F, Flood M, Kerrigan S. Risk factors for development of new onset cardiovascular complications in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021232046. 
  Management of renal complications 2020-05-157/11No The effects of using renal replacement therapy for COVID-19 patients are uncertain
No Full reviewBenefits and harms Abdelrahman Z, Liu Q, Jiang S, Li M, Zhang Y, Wang X. Evaluation of the current therapeutic approaches for COVID-19: A meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020.
   2020-08-018/11 No Among COVID-19 patients requiring admission to an ICU, renal replacement therapy was required in one-fifth of the cases [Review of observational studies of variable quality]No Full review Other Tan E, Song J, Deane AM, Plummer MP. Global impact of COVID-19 infection requiring admission to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2020. 
   2020-07-25
7/11 No Acute kidney injury frequently occurs among COVID-19 patients, and it is more common among patients in that are hospitalized in ICU [Review of observational studies of variable quality] No Full review Other Yang X, Tian S, Guo H. Acute kidney injury and renal replacement therapy in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Immunopharmacology. 2020.  
   2020-06-16
9/11 Yes Around one-tenth of patients infected with coronaviruses experience acute kidney injury, which has been found to be associated with mortality rate [Review of observational studies of moderate quality conducted during COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks]No Full review Other Zhou S, Xu J, Xue C, Yang B, Mao Z, Ong ACM. Coronavirus-associated kidney outcomes in COVID-19, SARS, and MERS: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Renal Failure. 2020;43(1):1-15. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review exploring the nephrological and urological complications of COVID-19 is currently being conductedNo Protocol Other Tristao LS, Bernardo WM. Nephrological and urological complications of COVID-19: a systematic review. PROSPERO. 2020;CRD42020206155. 
   2020-05-15
8/11 No Being older than 60 years old, and having severe infection were found to be independent risk factors of acute kidney injury among COVID-19 patients [Review of studies of unknown quality] No Full review Other Lin L, Wang X, Ren J, Sun Y, Yu R, Li K, et al. Risk factors and prognosis for COVID-19-induced acute kidney injury: A meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2020;10(11):e042573.  
  Management of respiratory complications
Not Specified
4/9 No Although using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) seems to be beneficial for select COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, the recuperative effect of this strategy remains uncertain No Full review Other Haiduc AA, Alom S, Melamed N, Harky A. Role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19: A systematic review. Journal of cardiac surgery. 2020. 
   2020-08-01
8/11NoSubstantial heterogeneity was found among studies reporting the incidence of acute pulmonary embolism, but among hospitalized COVID-19 patients the risk seems to be higher for ICU patients [Review of observational studies]No Full review Other Roncon L, Zuin M, Barco S, Valerio L, Zuliani G, Zonzin P, et al. Incidence of acute pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2020;S0953-6205(20)30349-6.  
   2020-08-01
8/11 No Among COVID-19 patients requiring admission to an ICU, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was required in 6.4% of the cases [Review of observational studies of variable quality]No Full review Other Tan E, Song J, Deane AM, Plummer MP. Global impact of COVID-19 infection requiring admission to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2020. 
   2021-04-138/9 Yes [Photobiomodulation therapy] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Photobiomodulation therapy vs placebo. 2020.
   2020-04-30
5/10 No Limited evidence was found on the usefulness of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as rescue therapy for COVID-19 patients [Review of observational studies of low quality] No Rapid review Other Hu BS, Hu M, Jiang LX, Yu J, Chang Y, Cao Y, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with COVID-19: A rapid systematic review of case studies. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences. 2020;24(22):11945-11952.  
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating COVID-19 associated primary spontaneous tension pneumothorax is currently being conducted No Protocol Other Ahmed B, Yousaf Z, Ata F, Khan AA, Omran M, Ananthegowda DC, et al. A protocol for COVID-19 associated primary spontaneous tension pneumothorax – A systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021243133  
  Management of other complications
2020-05-15
5/10 No Limited evidence is available to evaluate whether COVID-19 could be an etiological factor in acute pancreatitis [Review of observational studies of low quality] No Full review Other Félix Juhász M, Ocskay K, Kiss S, Hegyi P, Párniczky A. Insufficient etiological workup of COVID-19-associated acute pancreatitis: A systematic review. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2020;26(40):6270-6278. 
   Not specified
4/9 No Erythema, urticaria, and rash are the most common dermatological lesions that have been documented in patients with SARS-CoV-2, although its correlation with COVID-19 infection is still uncertain [Review of observational studies] No Full review Other Almutairi A, Alfaleh M, Alasheikh M. Dermatological manifestations in patients with SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review. Cureus. 2020;12(7):e9446. 
   2020-04-10
7/11 No The use of personal protective equipment among patients may slightly extend the duration of intravascular access procedures, while intraosseous access may provide an alternative approach in some circumstances  No Full review Other Drozd A, Smereka J, Filipiak KJ, Jaguszewski M, Ładny JR, Bielski K, et al. Intraosseous versus intravenous access while wearing personal protective equipment: A meta-analysis in the era of COVID-19. Kardiologia Polska. 2021.  
   2020-08-01
9/10 No Delirium was found to be common among adults with COVID-19, whereas the pathoetiology or treatment of this relationship is not yet clear [Review of studies of mainly unknown quality]No Rapid review Other Hawkins M, Sockalingam S, Bonato S, Rajaratnam T, Ravindran M, Gosse P, et al. A rapid review of the pathoetiology, presentation, and management of delirium in adults with COVID-19. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2020; 
 Treatment of COVID-19 sequelae
2021-04-138/9 No Synthesis pending
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Rehabilitation. 2020. 
  2020-05-31
4/9 No Neurological events might be a common sequelae of COVID-19 infection, and early rehabiltiation is recommended for the acute phase of the infection using proper virtual care for the post-acute phase Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Other de Sire A, Andrenelli E, Negrini F, Negrini S, Ceravolo M. Systematic Rapid Living Review on Rehabilitation Needs Due to Covid-19: Update to April 30th 2020. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2020. 
  2020-12-31
5/10 No Neurological events might be frequently associated with COVID-19 infection, and given the sparse evidence for rehabilitation interventions, the effects of individual treatments are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Other De Sire A, Andrenelli E, Negrini F, Lazzarini SG, Patrini M, Ceravolo MG. Rehabilitation and COVID-19: a rapid living systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field updated as of December 31st, 2020 and synthesis of the scientific literature of 2020. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2021.
  2020-04-18
8/11 No Whereas the most common neurological symptoms associated with COVID-19 are headaches, dizziness, nausea and vomiting, confusion and myalgias, the most common neurological complications are cerebral infarction or hemorrhage, or cerebral sinus venous thrombosisNo Full review Other Collantes MEV, Espiritu AI, Sy MCC, Anlacan VMM, Jamora RDG. Neurological manifestations in COVID-19 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Canadian journal of neurological sciences. 2020;1-26. 
  Not specified 7/9NoAudio-vestibular symptoms in COVID-19 patients are not commonly reported in the literature at present [Review mainly based on low quality studies]
NoRapid reviewOtherAlmufarrij I, Uus K, Munro KJ. Does coronavirus affect the audio-vestibular system? A rapid systematic review. International Journal of Audiology. 2020; 59(7): 487-449
  2020-07-26
6/9 No Common neurological manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection include fatigue, headache, and smell/taste disorders, and these are similar to the symptoms of SARS-CoV-1 infection [Review of observational studies conducted during COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks]No Full review Other Almqvist J, Granberg T, Tzortzakakis A, Klironomos S, Kollia E, Öhberg C, et al. Neurological manifestations of coronavirus infections - A systematic review. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology. 2020; 
  2020-07-31
6/9 No Fever, gastrointestinal and kidney disease symptoms appear to be common among children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and while critically ill, the majority of patients recoverNo Full review Other Kaushik A, Gupta S, Sood M, Sharma S, Verma S. A systematic review of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 2020. 
  2020-05-11
4/9 No Evidence suggests that male fertility may be affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection especially in young children undergoing puberty [Review of observational studies of unknown quality conducted during COVID-19 and SARS outbreaks] No Full review Other Vishvkarma R & Rajender S. Could SARS-CoV-2 affect male fertility?. Andrologia. 2020;52(9):e13712.  
  2020-09-15
6/9 Yes A systematic review of autopsy findings found evidence of abnormalities in multiple organs and systemsNo Full review Other Hammoud H, Bendari A, Bendari T, Bougmiza I. Histopathological findings in COVID-19 cases: A systematic review. medRxiv. 2020.  
  2020-07-15
7/11 No Impaired lung function indicated by altered diffusion capacity was observed in 39% of COVID-19 patients post-infection. Restrictive and obstructive patterns of impairment were also found but were less frequent [Review of low and fair quality studies]No Full review Other Torres-Castro R, Vasconcello-Castillo L, Alsina-Restoy X, Solis-Navarro L, Burgos F, Puppo H, et al. Respiratory function in patients post-infection by COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pulmonology. 2020:S2531-0437(20)30245-2. 
  N/A (protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating short- and long-term healthcare use among COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital with physical functional impairment is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16) Protocol Other Gordon A, Sharpe J, Allen K, Ballengee L, Burke C, Zullig L, et al. COVID-19 functional status sequelae. PROSPERO. 2020; CRD42020215229.  
  N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review evaluating pediatric massage therapy for restoring pediatric lung function from COVID-19 is currently being conductedNo Protocol Benefits and harms Shuo Dong, Kelin Zhou, Sheng Guo, Kang Wang, Guobing Fu, Xiaona Xue, Yan Niu. Pediatric massage therapy for restoring pediatric lung function from COVID-19: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020193396 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020193396 
  N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the efficacy of using nintedanib for SARS-CoV-2 induced pulmonary fibrosis is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-12) ProtocolBenefits and harms Nafea A, Mahmoud A, Elanany I, Altaweel A. Efficacy of nintedanib in SARS-Cov-2 induced pulmonary fibrosis management: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021234436 
  N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A review characterizing SARS-CoV-2 oral disorders in children and adolescents with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-12)
Protocol Other Costa FW, Pereira K, Roger A, Pires F, Manoela T, Feitosa S, et al. Characterization of oral disorders related to SARS-CoV-2 in children and adolescents with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome: A systematic living review. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021240550 
 Community-based treatment of COVID-19
2020-04-02 4/9 No Community-centered care including screening, isolating suspected cases, managing mild cases, and providing care for recovered COVID-19 patients can help to reduce pressure on hospitals No Rapid review Other El-Jardali F, Fadlallah R, Daher N, Jabbour M. K2P COVID-19 Rapid response series: Suppressing COVID-19 epidemic through community-centered care approach. Beirut, Lebanon: Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center; 2020.  
  N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating nutritional interventions for transitioning patients with COVID-19 into the community after discharge from hospital is currently being conductedNo Protocol Other Weekes E, Hickson M, Murphy J, Frost G, Julian A, Latif J. In patients hospitalised with COVID-19 infection, what is the best way of ensuring continuity of nutritional care on hospital discharge to minimise the nutritional consequences of infection and optimise recovery? PROSPERO. 2020; CRD42020208448. 
 Complementary and alternative therapies
N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Chinese herbal medicine] [Protocol - results not yet available] An umbrella review on the effectiveness of several COVID-19 treatments, including chinese herbal medicine, is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16)
Protocol Benefits and harms Zhu J, Zheng Y, Wu J. Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: a Living Umbrella Review. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020170086. 
  2020-07-27
7/11 No [Chinese herbal medicine] Lianhua Qingwen combined with conventional drugs may improve symptoms of common pneumonia and COVID-19 pneumonia [Review of studies of variable risk of bias]No Full review Benefits and harms Hu C, Liang M, Gong F, He B, Zhao D, Zhang G. Efficacy of lianhua qingwen compared with conventional drugs in the treatment of common pneumonia and COVID-19 pneumonia: A meta-analysis. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2020. 
  2020-06-30
9/11 Yes Using traditional Chinese medicine as an auxiliary treatment for COVID-19 may slightly increase the cure rate, probably slightly relieves cough, and probably slightly improves chest CT images No Full review Benefits and harms Zhou LP, Wang J, Xie RH, Pakhale S, Krewski D, Cameron DW, et al. The effects of traditional Chinese medicine as an auxiliary treatment for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 2020. 
  N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the integration of Chinese and western medicine for the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16) Protocol Benefits and harms Wang Q, Li M, Zhu H, Yang Q, Cao X, Ge L. Treatment and prophylaxis of integrating Chinese and western medicine of COVID-19: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2020;CRD42020218802. 
  N/A (Protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the impact of AYUSH (ayurveda, yoga, naturopathy, unani, siddha, sowa riga, and homeopathy) interventions on COVID-19 is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-12) Protocol Benefits and harms Thakar A, Goyal M, Panara K, Kumari R. Impact of AYUSH interventions on Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): a living systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021;CRD42021244831. 
  2020-09-0110/11NoThe effects of chinese herbal medicine (3 medicines and 3 formulations) for treating COVID-19 patients are uncertain [Review of randomized and observational studies mainly of low quality]NoRapid reviewBenefits and harmsHu X-Y, Wang Y, Chen J, Greenhalgh T, Wardle J. Chinese herbal medicine (“3 medicines and 3 formulations”) for COVID-19: Rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. Research Square. 2021.
  2020-04-2710/11NoThe add-on effect of Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of COVID-19 is currently uncertain [Review including mainly low quality studies]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsLuo X, Ni X, Lin J, et al. The add-on effect of Chinese herbal medicine on COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jul 11]. Phytomedicine. 2020;153282. doi:10.1016/j.phymed.2020.153282
Clinical management of pandemic-related impacts on health more generally         
 Interrupted management of other types of urgent care 2020-09-06
6/10 No During the COVID-19 pandemic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests had delayed  arrival times to emergency medical services, and less time to provide adequate acute care [Review of observational studies of high risk of bias] No Full review Other Scquizzato T, Landoni G, Paoli A, Lembo R, Fominskiy E, Kuzovlev A, et al. Effects of COVID-19 pandemic on out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: A systematic review. Resuscitation. 2020. 
  Not specified
7/11 No An increase in the incidence and mortality of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest has been reported during the COVID-19 pandemic, while the time from call to ambulance arrival has increased, and the frequency of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automatic external defibrillator use has been reduced [Review of studies of fair and good quality] No Full review Other Lim ZJ, Reddy MP, Afroz A, Billah B, Shekar K, Subramaniam A. Incidence and outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in the COVID-19 era: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. 2020. 
  2020-08-12
7/10 No A substantial decrease in the number of hospital admissions for acute cardiovascular disease has been reported during the COVID-19 pandemic, with shorter lengths of stay and fewer procedures performed [Review of studies of variable quality] No Full review Other Kiss P, Carcel C, Hockham C, Peters SAE. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care and management of patients with acute cardiovascular disease: A systematic review. European Heart Journal: Quality of Care & Clinical Outcomes. 2020;qcaa084. 
 Interrupted management or poor self management of chronic conditions  2020-05-15 4/9 No A review of nine studies focused on 12 COVID-19 patients with chronic dermatologic conditions suggested that ceasing any dermatological treatments using immunomodulators and then re-starting them after the acute stage of COVID-19 infection may be considered to reduce the risk of severe recurrance of the dermatological condition as well as a distrubing cytokine storm No Full review Other Najar Nobar N, Goodarzi A. Patients with specific skin disorders who are affected by COVID-19: what do experiences say about management strategies? : A systematic review [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 18]. Dermatol Ther. 2020;e13867. doi:10.1111/dth.13867 
  2020-05-23
7/11 No There has been no reported association between any particular oncologic therapy or treatment modality and COVID-19 mortality  No Full review Other Venkatesulu BP, Chandrasekar VT, Girdhar P, Advani P, Sharma A, Elumalai T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer patients affected by a novel coronavirus. medRxiv. 2020. 
  2020-08-064/11No Adherence to therapies for inflammatory bowel disease decreased internationally during the COVID-19 pandemic, with some regional variation [Review of observational studies] NoFull review OtherJena A, Singh AK, Kumar-M P, Sharma V, Sebastian S. Systematic review on failure to adhere to IBD therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic: Correct information is crucial. Digestive and Liver Disease. 2020.
  2020-08-10
7/10 NoA substantial decrease in healthcare utilization during the pandemic has been found, mainly driven by people with less severe illness who are accessing less care [Review of observational studies]No Full review Other Moynihan R, Sanders S, Michaleff ZA, Scott A, Clark J, To EM, et al. Pandemic impacts on healthcare utilisation: A systematic review. medRxiv. 2020. 
 Management of COVID-19 alongside other infectious diseasesN/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 associated aspergillosis is currently being conducted No Protocol Other Mitra S, Ling RR, Tan CS, MacLaren G, Ramanathan K. Incidence and Outcomes of COVID-19 Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO. 2021;CRD42021227821. 
  N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating bacterial co-infections in patients with COVID-19 is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-12) Protocol Other Langford B, So M, Leung V, Raybardhan S, Westwood D, Lo J, et al. Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection in patients with COVID-19: A rapid living review: 2021 update with meta-regression. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021241098  
 Management considerations for chronic and other existing health conditions
        
  Chronic conditions2020-07-05
7/9Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review on clinical management of COVID-19 patients with an undergoing treatment for immune-mediated inflammatory disease is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Other Rocha APD, Atallah AN, Pinto A, Rocha-Filho CR, Milby KM, Civile VT, et al. COVID-19 and patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases undergoing pharmacological treatments: A rapid living systematic review. Sao Paulo Medical Journal. 2020;138(6):515-520. 
  Cancer 2020-05-23
7/11NoA systematic review of observational studies showed no association between receiving a particular cancer therapy and mortality in patients with COVID-19NoFull reviewOtherVenkatesulu BP, Chandrasekar VT, Girdhar P, Advani P, Sharma A, Elumalai T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer patients affected by a novel coronavirus. medRxiv. 2020. 
   2020-04-15
4/9 No No studies were found about the effects of adjusting dexamethasone-based antiemetic regimens for cancer patients with COVID-19 No Full review Other Grant RC, Rotstein C, Liu G, et al. Reducing dexamethasone antiemetic prophylaxis during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from Ontario, Canada [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 30]. Support Care Cancer. 2020;1-6. doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05588-6 
   2020-10-10
8/11No Limited and highly heterogenous evidence shows that among cancer patients with COVID-19, chemotherapy might be associated with increased mortality [Review of observational studies]No Full review Other Park R, Lee SA, Kim SY, de Melo AC, Kasi A. Association of active oncologic treatment and risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient data. Acta Oncologica. 2020. 
  Other conditions2020-05-22 5/9 No Among solid-organ recipients that are on medications to modulate their inflammatory response, antimetabolites were mostly ceased among COVID-19 patients, whereas corticorsteroids were kept at the same dosage or increased No Full review Other Moosavi SA, Mashhadiagha A, Motazedian N, Hashemazar A, Hoveidaei AH, Bolignano D. COVID-19 clinical manifestations and treatment strategies among solid-organ recipients: A systematic review of cases. Transplant infectious disease. 2020;e13427. 
   2020-10-09 6/11No Evidence shows that for the majority of patients who were the recipient of a solid organ transplant during the COVID-19 pandemic, antimetabolites were either reduced or stopped [Review of observational studies of unknown quality] No Full review Other Raja MA, Mendoza MA, Villavicencio A, Anjan S, Reynolds JM, Kittipibul V, et al. COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature. Transplantation Reviews. 2020;35(1).  
 See assessing most important prognostic factors for prognostic reviews addressing drug treatment interruptions

  
        
 Burn-out and trauma in essential workers         
  Psychosocial support
2020-09-12
9/9 No Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms The Depressed Project. Living Systematic Review of Mental Health in COVID-19. Montreal: 2020. 
   2020-07-31 6/10No Health professionals have been one of the populations at greatest risk of suffering major mental-health complications during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is possible that those working in low-resource settings are most at risk, and that a range of remote interventions for addressing these complications are being evaluated [Review of observational studies]NoRapid review Other Soklaridis S, Lin E, Lalani Y, Rodak T, Sockalingam S. Mental health interventions and supports during COVID- 19 and other medical pandemics: A rapid systematic review of the evidence. General Hospital Psychiatry. 2020;66:133-146. 
   2021-01-18
4/11 No Clinical staff working in high-exposure roles may report slightly higher rates of anxiety and depression compared to low-exposure roles but the evidence is uncertain, and in both groups baseline rates of poor mental health are high [Review of studies of unknown quality conducted during COVID-19, Ebola, H1N1, MERS, and SARS outbreaks]Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Other Bell V & Wade D. Mental health of clinical staff working in high-risk epidemic and pandemic health emergencies a rapid review of the evidence and living meta-analysis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2020.  
   2020-06-01
9/11 No Among front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients, the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression were 45%, 26% and 24%, respectively No Full review Other Salari N, Khazaie H, Hosseinian-Far A, Khaledi-Paveh B, Kazeminia M, Mohammadi M, et al. The prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression within front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-regression. Human Resources for Health. 2020;18(1):100.  
   N/A (protocol)
n/a Yes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating psychological and psychosocial support interventions for prevention and treatment of anxiety and depression among young healthcare workers is currently being conductedNo Protocol Benefits and harms Naveed S, Akhtar P, Meraj H, Afzaal T, Waqas A. Social support interventions for prevention and treatment of anxiety and depression among young healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2020; CRD42020210903.  
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aYes [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and work ability of healthcare workers is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16) Protocol Other Kunzler AM, Röthke N, Lindner S, Stoffers-Winterling J, Inti-Metzendorf M, Sachkova A et al. Consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and work ability of healthcare workers as well as risk and protective factors for mental health – protocol for a living systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021; 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating interventions to foster mental health among healthcare workers is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16) Protocol Other Kunzler AM, Röthke N, Lindner S, Stoffers-Winterling J, Inti-Metzendorf M, Sachkova A et al. Interventions to foster mental health, psychosocial support, resilience and/or stress management in healthcare workers in face of the COVID-19 pandemic protocol for a living systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021; 
  Burn-out care
2020-09-12 9/9 No Synthesis pending Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms The Depressed Project. Living Systematic Review of Mental Health in COVID-19. Montreal: 2020. 
  
2020-05-11
7/10YesThe prevalence of mental health outcomes among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic is uncertainNoRapid reviewOtherMuller AE, Hafstad EV, Himmels JPW, Smedslund G, Flottorp S, Stensland S, et al. The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: a rapid systematic review. medRxiv. 2020 Jan 1;2020.07.03.20145607.
   2020-04-15
8/10 No Substantial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of health care workers was found, mainly driven by general health concerns and fear [Review of studies conducted during COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks]No Full review OtherSalazar de Pablo G, Vaquerizo-Serrano J, Catalan A, et al. Impact of coronavirus syndromes on physical and mental health of health care workers: Systematic review and meta-analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 25]. J Affect Disord. 2020;275:48-57. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.06.022 
   2020-11-15
8/11 No A high level of burnout has been reported by nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic, with levels even higher than those observed in traditionally stressful environments [Review of studies of moderate and good quality] No Full review Other Galanis PA, Vraka I, Fragkou D, Bilali A, Kaitelidou D. Nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2020.  
  Trauma-informed care 2020-04-01
7/11 No During the COVID-19 pandemic, health professionals experience a higher level of mental trauma with psychiatric repercussions, compared to the general population No Full review Other da Silva FCT, Neto MLR. Psychiatric symptomatology associated with depression, anxiety, distress, and insomnia in health professionals working in patients affected by COVID-19: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Progress in neuro-psychopharmacology biological psychiatry. 2020;104:110057. 
   2020-05-18
10/11 No Evidence shows that about 20% of healthcare workers have reported a diagnosis or symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder during coronaviruses outbreaks [Review of studies of variable quality conducted during COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks] No Full review Other Salehi M, Amanat M, Mohammadi M, Salmanian M, Rezaei N, Saghazadeh A, et al. The prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder related symptoms in Coronavirus outbreaks: A systematic-review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2021;282:527-538.  
   2020-08-239/11NoThe prevalence of postraumatic stress disorders was found to increase after infectious disease pandemics, especially among frontline healthcare workers and infected people [Review of studies conducted during COVID-19 and other outbreaks with high heterogeneity]NoFull reviewOtherYuan K, Gong YM, Liu L, Sun YK, Tian SS, Wang YJ, et al. Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder after infectious disease pandemics in the twenty-first century, including COVID-19: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Molecular Psychiatry. 2021;1-17. 
 Mental health and additions issues related to the pandemic response         
  Remote management of existing conditions 2020-09-12
9/9 No Synthesis pendingYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Benefits and harms The Depressed Project. Living Systematic Review of Mental Health in COVID-19. Montreal: 2020. 
  Remote management of existing conditions 2020-06-17 4/9No A scoping review found a number of comercially available digital tools to address psychological symptoms associated with COVID-19, including those that are web-based, mobile and conversational agents, but did not report findings from evaluations of such toolsNoFull review Other Zhang M, Smith HE. Digital tools to ameliorate psychological symptoms associated with COVID-19: Scoping review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2020;22(8):e19706. 
  Management of pandemic-related exacerbations of existing conditions N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health symptoms and addictions is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Other Salanti G, Papakonstantinou T, Cipriani A, Furukawa T, Leucht S. Living Systematic Review on the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the General Populations' Mental Health, Alcohol/Substance Abuse and Violence. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020180049. 
    2020-09-10 8/10 NoThe effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and similar events on substance use, safety, overdoses and substance-related deaths are uncertain but experience from previous pandemics and similar events suggest that substance users may have reduced access to harm reduction and treatment services, and that the supply of illicit substances may be disruptedNoRapid review Other National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid Review Update 1: What is the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid and substance use and related harms? Hamilton, ON: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020.
   2020-06-16 8/10 NoA rapid review found only cross-sectional studies showing unclear results regarding the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on alcohol use and alcohol-related harmsNoRapid review Other National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid review: What is the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on alcohol use and alcohol-related harms? Hamilton, ON: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020.
   2020-08-067/10NoA rapid review only identified in-progress studies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health and wellbeing of caregivers and families of autistic people with results from these studies pending
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review OtherWeiss J, Lee V, Albaum C, Modica PT, Khanlou N, Ahmad F, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on the mental health and wellbeing of caregivers and families of autistic people: A rapid synthesis review. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. 2020. 
  
2020-08-125/9NoAlthough there appears to be high burden of sleep disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic, few interventions have been identified to address this problem
NoFull review Other Tasnim S, Rahman M, Pawar P, Chi X, Yu Q, Zou L, et al. Epidemiology of sleep disorders during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic scoping review. medRxiv. 2020.  
  Management of pandemic-related emergence of conditions
2020-09-129/9 NoInfluence of COVID-19 generally, and influence of government responses to pandemic specifically on mental health, vary across different populations, with the impacts on vulnerable populations and on effective interventions to support them an emerging area of interest
Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review 
Benefits and harms  The Depressed Project. Living Systematic Review of Mental Health in COVID-19. Montreal: 2020. 
   2020-05-25
7/11 No The COVID-19 pandemic has a large psychosocial impact on the general public No Full review Other Luo M, Guo L, Yu M, Wang H. The psychological and mental impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on medical staff and general public - A systematic review and meta-analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 7]. Psychiatry Res. 2020;291:113190. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113190 
   N/A (Protocol) n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health symptoms and addictions is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)Protocol Other Salanti G, Papakonstantinou T, Cipriani A, Furukawa T, Leucht S. Living Systematic Review on the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the General Populations' Mental Health, Alcohol/Substance Abuse and Violence. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020180049. 
   2020-06-078/10YesA living review has yet to find studies that measure how the COVID-19 pandemic affects mental health in ways that are associated with domestic violenceYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full reviewOther John A, Eyles E, McGuinness LA, Okolie C, Olorisade BK, Schmidt L, Webb RT, Arenseman E, Hawton K, Kapur N, Moran P, O'Connor RC, O'Neill S, Gunnell D, Higgins JPT. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: protocol for a living systematic review [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2020;9:644.
   2020-07-01
5/9 No Depression and anxiety have been the most frequent mental health conditions that pregnant and puerperal women have reported as a result of COVID-19 No Full review Other Vieira LG, Camargo ELS, Schneider G, et al. Repercussions of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Pregnant and Puerperal Women: A Systematic Review. medRxiv 2020. 
   2020-07-298/11No Meta-regresssion modelling has found that anxiety levels appear to have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that of all of the physical distancing measures implemented, the closure of public transport has been the only intervention found to be directly associated with this increase [Review of observational studies]NoFull review Other Castaldelli-Maia JM, Marziali ME, Lu Z, Martins SS. Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression. 2020.
   2020-05-088/11 No A review of prevalence studies suggests that depression rates are extremely variable across countries during the COVID-19 pandemic but that they have probably risen in most, and substantially in some jurisdictions 
NoFull review Other Bueno-Notivol J, Gracia-Garcia P, Olaya B, Lasheras I, Lopez-Anton R, Santabarbara J. Prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 outbreak: A meta-analysis of community-based studies. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2020. 
   2020-04-228/11 No Persons under quarantine and subject to isolation-containment strategies might be at greater risk of adverse mental and physical health outcomes [Review of observational studies conducted during COVID-19, MERS, SARS and other infectious-diseases outbreaks]
NoFull review Other Henssler J, Stock F, van Bohemen J, Walter H, Heinz A, Brandt L. Mental health effects of infection containment strategies: Quarantine and isolation - A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 2020. 
  
N/A (protocol)n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture and relevant interventions as adjunctive therapy for anxiety in COVID-19 is currently being conducted
NoProtocol Benefits and harms  Jia H, Han Z, Zhang K, Tang Q, Sun K, Huang H, et al. Acupuncture and related interventions for anxiety in coronavirus disease 2019: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(30):e21317.
   2020-04-188/11No A systematic review of prevalence studies showed that estimates of prevalence in the general population range from 14% to 33% for posttraumatic stress and from 12% to 38% for psychological stress during the COVID-19 pandemic NoRapid review Other Cooke JE, Eirich R, Racine N, Madigan S. Prevalence of posttraumatic and general psychological stress during COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry research. 2020;292:113347.
   2020-05-07
7/10 No Low-to-moderate quality evidence showed that the potential negative effects of physical distancing on mental health are exacerbated by quarantine duration, infection fear, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss, and stigma [Review of syntheses and single studies conducted during the COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 era] Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Benefits and harms National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. How does physical distancing impact mental health?. Hamilton: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020. 
   2020-08-12
5/9 No COVID-19 pandemic might be associated with an increase in sleep disorders, particularly in women, young people, and healthcare workers [Review of observational studies of unknown quality]No Full review Other Tasnim S, Rahman M, Pawar P, Chi X, Yu Q, Zou L, et al. Epidemiology of sleep disorders during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic scoping review. medRxiv. 2020.  
   2020-05-18
10/11 No Evidence shows that about 30% of people that have had a coronavirus infection report a diagnosis or symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder  during coronaviruses outbreaks [Review of studies of variable quality conducted during COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks]No Full review Other Salehi M, Amanat M, Mohammadi M, Salmanian M, Rezaei N, Saghazadeh A, et al. The prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder related symptoms in Coronavirus outbreaks: A systematic-review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2021;282:527-538.  
   2020-04-018/10NoEvidence shows that most effective interventions to reduce loneliness involved cognitive or education components, facilitated communications, and networking between peers, while very few interventions were found to be effective against social isolation [Review of observational studies of mainly low to moderate quality conducted during and pre COVID-19 era]NoRapid reviewOtherWilliams CYK, Townson AT, Kapur M, Ferreira AF, Nunn R, Galante J, Phillips V, Gentry S, Usher-Smith JA. Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness during COVID-19 physical distancing measures: A rapid systematic review. PLoS One. 2021 Feb 17;16(2):e0247139.
   2021-01-018/11NoThe prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety and sleep disturbances has been estimated to be more than 30% among students in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies of variable quality and high heterogeneity]NoFull reviewOtherDeng J, Zhou F, Hou W, Silver Z, Wong CY, Chang O, Drakos A, Zuo QK, Huang E. The prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and sleep disturbance in higher education students duringthe COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry  Research. 2021.
   N/A (Protocol)n/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review exploring the psychological effects of bereavement due to the COVID-19 pandemic is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-11-16)ProtocolOtherReitsma L, Lenferink L, Boelen P. Psychological effects of bereavement due to COVID-19: a living systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021;CRD42021225347.
   2020-09-018/10NoSchool closures have been associated with a considerable harm to the health and well-being of children and young people [Review of studies of variable quality conducted during and pre COVID-19 era]NoFull reviewOtherViner R, Russell R, Saulle R, Croker H, Stansfeld C, Packer J, et al. Impacts of school closures on physical and mental health of children and young people: A systematic review. medRxiv. 2021.
 Reproductive care for patients with COVID-19         
  Antenatal care 2020-04-30
8/11NoCurrent evidence suggests the most common signs of COVID-19 in pregnant women include fever, dry cough, sore throat and ground-glass opacities on CT scan, and that the risk of pre-term birth and cesarian section may be higherNoFull reviewOtherMatar R, Alrahmani L, Monzer N, et al. Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Pregnant Women with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 23]. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;ciaa828. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa828
   2020-04-18
8/10 No A review of case reports and case series found that most pregnant women with COVID-19 infection developed a mild or moderate severity illness, and while most  babies born to infected women tested negative for infection, a minority were symptomatic irrespective of the result of diagnostic testsNo Full review Other Trippella G, Ciarcià M, Ferrari M, et al. COVID-19 in Pregnant Women and Neonates: A Systematic Review of the Literature with Quality Assessment of the Studies. Pathogens. 2020;9(6):E485. Published 2020 Jun 18. doi:10.3390/pathogens9060485 
   N/A (Protocol)n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the symptoms and manifestations of COVID-19 among pregnant women is currently being conducted Yes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
ProtocolOtherMalouf R, Abbakar N, Burton H, Opondo C. Pregnant Women and their Babies and COVID-19 Pandemic: a Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020179989.
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the risks of COVID-19 infection among pregnant women is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
ProtocolOtherMerino L, Meza N, Carrasco C, Bohórquez S, Rada G, Izcovich A. COVID-19 Prognosis in Pregnant Women: a Living Systematic Review. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020180767. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review to understand the outcomes of pregnancies complicated by COVID-19 is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)ProtocolOtherGatta A, Roberta R, Amodeo S, Giuliana S. A Living Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Pregnancies Complicated by COVID -19. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020185751. 
   2020-06-26
7/10 No Pregnant women with COVID-19 are less likely to present fever and myalgia, but they might be more likely to be admitted to an intensive care unit compared with non-pregnant women with COVID [Review of observational studies]Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Other Allotey J, Stallings E, Bonet M, Yap M, Chatterjee S, Kew T, et al. Clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy: Living systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m3320.  
   2020-08-17
7/9 No The effects of COVID-19 during pregnancy on adverse maternal outcomes are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid review Other National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid Review Update 1: Is there an increased risk of adverse maternal or fetal outcomes in women infected with COVID-19 during pregnancy? Hamilton, ON: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020. 
   2020-07-05
6/11 No Evidence suggests that anxiety symptoms have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic among pregnant women [Review of observational studies of unknown quality] No Full review Other Hessami K, Romanelli C, Chiurazzi M, Cozzolino M. COVID-19 pandemic and maternal mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2020. 
   2020-06-01
5/9 No Case reports show that SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy might not affect the immune characteristics of women, although it has been associated with a lower-than-predicted number of white blood cells [Review of observational studies of low quality] No Full review Other Areia AL & Mota-Pinto A. Can immunity during pregnancy influence SARS-CoV-2 infection? - A systematic review. Journal of Reproductive Immunology. 2020;142. 
   2020-04-27
8/11 No The clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in pregnant women are similar to non-pregnant women, although fever and cough are less frequent [Review of studies of moderate quality] No Full review Other Novoa RH, Quintana W, Llancarí P, Urbina-Quispe K, Guevara-Ríos E, Ventura W. Maternal clinical characteristics and perinatal outcomes among pregnant women with Coronavirus Disease 2019. A systematic review. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2020;39:101919. 
   N/A (Protocol)n/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review examining the association between COVID-19 infection during pregnancy, severity, and the effects of interventions is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-01-11)ProtocolOtherWei SQ, Bertrand MB, Liu S, Auger N. COVID-19 morbidity, severity and intervention in pregnancy: A living systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021232343
  Childbirth 2020-05-04
8/11 No The incidence of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women and the occurrence of preterm deliveries among pregnant women with COVID-19 is uncertain No Full review Other de Melo GC, de Araújo KCGM. COVID-19 infection in pregnant women, preterm delivery, birth weight, and vertical transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cadernos de saude publica. 2020;36(7):e00087320. 
   2020-06-26
7/10 No Pregnant women with COVID-19 are at higher risk of having preterm birth [Review of observational studies] Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Other Allotey J, Stallings E, Bonet M, Yap M, Chatterjee S, Kew T, et al. Clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy: Living systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m3320.  
   2020-04-16
9/11 No Current evidence suggests that the rate of preterm labor is higher in pregnant women with COVID-19, compared to normal pregnant women NoFull reviewOther Gao YJ, Ye L, Zhang JS, Yin YX, Liu M, Yu HB, et al. Clinical features and outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC infectious diseases. 2020;20:564.
   N/A (Protocol) n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review to understand the birth outcomes of pregnancies complicated by COVID-19 is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Other Gatta A, Roberta R, Amodeo S, Giuliana S. A Living Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Pregnancies Complicated by COVID -19. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020185751. 
   2020-08-17 7/9 No The effects of COVID-19 during pregnancy on labour and delivery outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid reviewOtherNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid Review Update 1: Is there an increased risk of adverse maternal or fetal outcomes in women infected with COVID-19 during pregnancy? Hamilton, ON: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020.
   2020-05-08
10/11 No A meta-analysis showed a high frequency of preterm births and casesarean deliveries among pregnant women with COVID-19, which was not fully explained by severity or faetal compromise [Review of observational studies of moderate quality] No Full review Other Di Toro F, Gjoka M, Di Lorenzo G, De Seta F, Maso G, Risso FM, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2020. 
   2020-06-187/9YesThe risk of neonatal or maternal death may not increase when infants are delivered by women with COVID-19 through cesarean section compared to vaginal deliveryNoFull reviewOtherCai J, Tang M, Gao Y, Zhang H, Yang Y, Zhang D, et al. Cesarean section or vaginal delivery to prevent possible vertical transmission from a pregnant mother confirmed with COVID-19 to a neonate: A systematic review. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8:634949. 
  Post-partum care
N/A (Protocol)n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the symptoms and manifestations of COVID-19 among women in the postpartum period is currently being conducted
Yes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)ProtocolOther Malouf R, Abbakar N, Burton H, Opondo C. Pregnant Women and their Babies and COVID-19 Pandemic: a Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020179989.
  
2020-07-01 5/9 No Evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of puerperal women, with depression and anxiety being the most frequently reported conditions
NoFull review Other Vieira LG, Camargo ELS, Schneider G, et al. Repercussions of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Pregnant and Puerperal Women: A Systematic Review. medRxiv 2020. 
   2020-07-05
6/11 No Evidence suggests that anxiety symptoms have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic among women on perinatal periods [Review of observational studies of unknown quality] No Full review Other Hessami K, Romanelli C, Chiurazzi M, Cozzolino M. COVID-19 pandemic and maternal mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2020. 
   2020-05-08
10/11 No A meta-analysis showed a low rate of breastfeeding among pregnant women with COVID-19, which was not fully explained by severity or faetal compromise [Review of observational studies of moderate quality] No Full review Other Di Toro F, Gjoka M, Di Lorenzo G, De Seta F, Maso G, Risso FM, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2020. 
  Newborn care 2020-04-18
8/10 No A review of case reports and case series found that babies born to an infected mother are not at an increased risk of poor neonatal outcomes, and while a minority tested positive for the virus there is still uncertainty around vertical transmissionNo Full review Other Trippella G, Ciarcià M, Ferrari M, et al. COVID-19 in Pregnant Women and Neonates: A Systematic Review of the Literature with Quality Assessment of the Studies. Pathogens. 2020;9(6):E485. Published 2020 Jun 18. doi:10.3390/pathogens9060485 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the transmission of COVID-19 through breast milk is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
ProtocolOther Centeno-Tablante E, Medina-Rivera M, Finkelstein J, Rayco-Solon P, Garcia-Casal M, Ghezzi-Kopel K, et al. Transmission of Novel Coronavirus-19 through Breast Milk and Breastfeeding. A Living Systematic Review of the Evidence. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020178664. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a
No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the safety of COVID-19 medications for breastfeeding women is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Benefits and harms Chang Y, Fisher J, Sutcliffe P, Hillman S, Chien L, Cheema E, et al. The Safety of Prescription-Only Medications for Breastfeeding in Women who Took or were Administered them for Diagnosed or Suspected COVID-19 infection: a living systematic review. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020187101. 
   N/A (Protocol)
n/a
No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review identifying the factors associated with initiation, continuation and breastfeeding exclusivity is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Other Fisher J, Chang Y, Chien L, Hillman S, Sutcliffe P, Bick D. Factors that are Associated with Breastfeeding Initiation, Duration and Exclusivity of Breastfeeding During the SARS-Cov-2 Pandemic? A Living Systematic Review. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020187235. 
   2020-05-04
8/11 No The effect of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women on the risk of preterm deliveries is uncertain, and the possibillity of vertical transmission to newborns cannot be ruled out No Full review Other de Melo GC, de Araújo KCGM. COVID-19 infection in pregnant women, preterm delivery, birth weight, and vertical transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cadernos de saude publica. 2020;36(7):e00087320. 
   2020-06-26
7/10 No Neonates delivered by a mother infected with COVID-19 during pregnancy are more likely to be admitted to a neonatal unit [Review of observational studies]Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Other Allotey J, Stallings E, Bonet M, Yap M, Chatterjee S, Kew T, et al. Clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy: Living systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m3320.  
   2020-04-30
7/11 No A review of coronavirus infection during pregnancy found no studies that reported evidence meterno-fetal transmission [Review of observational studies conducted during COVID-19, MERS, and SARS outbreaks]No Full review Other Diriba K, Awulachew E, Getu E. The effect of coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV) during pregnancy and the possibility of vertical maternal-fetal transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Medical Research. 2020;25:39. 
   2020-08-17
7/9 No The effects of COVID-19 during pregnancy on fetal and neonatal outcomes are uncertain Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Rapid reviewOther National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid Review Update 1: Is there an increased risk of adverse maternal or fetal outcomes in women infected with COVID-19 during pregnancy? Hamilton, ON: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools; 2020. 
   2020-05-18
5/9 No Whereas low probability of vertical transmission in infants has been reported, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected among infants that tested negative for COVID-19 [Review of case reports and observational studies]Yes (row content last updated on 2021-04-19)Full review Other Bwire GM, Njiro BJ, Mwakawanga DL, Sabas D, Sunguya BF. Possible vertical transmission and antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among infants born to mothers with COVID-19: A living systematic review. Journal of Medical Virology. 2020. 
   2020-05-08
10/11 No The evidence on vertical transmission of COVID-19 from mother to baby is uncertain No Full review Other Di Toro F, Gjoka M, Di Lorenzo G, De Seta F, Maso G, Risso FM, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2020. 
  Contraception         
  Termination services         
 Domestic and gender-based violence related to the pandemic response         
  See economic and social responses
        
Health promotion more generally         
 Eating healthy food N/A (Protocol)
n/a No [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the relationship between lifestyle factors (including dietary habits) and COVID-19 infection is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Other Wesselius A, der Ven E, Bongaerts B, Dijksma I, Ament S, Falahi F, et al. Lifestyle Factors and COVID-19: a Rapid and Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020181902. 
  Not specified
4/9 No Although the role of nutrients on the immune system has been well documented, no clear evidence has shown an effect of nutrients on coronaviruses No Full review Other BourBour F, Dahka SM, Gholamalizadeh M, Akbari ME, Shadnoush M, Haghighi M, et al. Nutrients in prevention, treatment, and management of viral infections; Special focus on coronavirus. Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry. 2020. 
 Avoiding or minimizing unhealthy behaviours like smoking or excessive alcohol intake N/A (Protocol)
n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the relationship between lifestyle factors (including smoking) and COVID-19 infection is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)Protocol Other Wesselius A, der Ven E, Bongaerts B, Dijksma I, Ament S, Falahi F, et al. Lifestyle Factors and COVID-19: a Rapid and Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020181902. 
 Remaining physically active N/A (Protocol)n/aNo [Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review on the relationship between lifestyle factors (including physical activity) and COVID-19 infection is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2020-12-07)
Protocol Other Wesselius A, der Ven E, Bongaerts B, Dijksma I, Ament S, Falahi F, et al. Lifestyle Factors and COVID-19: a Rapid and Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020181902. 
 Staying social connected 2020-04-07
7/10 Yes The effects of using of videoconferencing interventions to reduce loneliness in older adults are uncertain No Full review Benefits and harms Noone C, McSharry J, Smalle M, et al. Video Calls for Reducing Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older People: a Rapid Review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;5:CD013632.