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 four ‘best’ living evidence syntheses covering the safety and efficacy of all drug types (rather than syntheses covering single molecules):

  1. BMJ | McMaster (which is the only group maintaining a living network meta-analysis that makes comparisons across molecules, and which also maintains a separate living evidence synthesis about prophylaxis for COVID-19)
  2. COVID-NMA (which is one of the two groups providing frequent updates to meta-analyses at the level of individual molecules)
  3. Pan American Health Organization (which is the second of two groups providing frequent updates to meta-analyses at the level of individual molecules)
  4. Copenhagen Trials Unit (The LIVING Project)

We include additional living evidence syntheses 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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;
  2021-07-147/10Yes[Bamlinivimab] Bamlinivimab probably decreases the incidence of symptomatic infection among exposed individuals Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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; 
  2021-07-2310/11Yes[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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
  2021-07-147/10Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Hydroxychloroquine may not reduce the risk of infection In individuals exposed to COVID-19 and it may slightly increase serious adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
  2021-01-20
10/11
Yes[Ivermectin] The effects of using ivermectin as a prophylactic treatment for COVID-19 are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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;
  2021-07-238/9Yes[Ivermectin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs Standard care. COVID-NMA. 2021;
  2021-02-018/11Yes[Ivermectin] Whereas limited evidence was found on the uses of ivermectin for COVID-19 prophylaxis in healthy populations, the evidence shows that it may slightly reduce COVID-19 infectionNoFull reviewBenefits and harmsBryant A, Lawrie TA, Dowswell T, Fordham E. Ivermectin for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Research Square. 2021.
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Ivermectin] [Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the use of ivermectin to prevent COVID-19 is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-05-31)ProtocolBenefits and harmsKirkovski A & Meyerowitz-Katz G. Ivermectin for treatment and prevention of COVID-19: A living systematic review. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021240995
Clinical treatment of COVID-19         
 Assessing most important prognostic factors 
2021-03-314/10No While age is the most important prognostic factor for estimating the likelihood of hospitalization, severe disease or death among COVID-19 patients, most comorbidities, male sex, non-white ethnicity and deprivation are also important Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
  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. 
  2021-04-015/10NoBeing older than 60 and having two or more comorbidities are probably the most important factors explaining high mortality rates due to COVID-19Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewOtherGates M, Pillay J, Wingert A, Guitard S, Rahman S, Zakher B, et al. Risk factors associated with severe outcomes of COVID-19: An updated rapid review to inform national guidance on vaccine prioritization in Canada. medRxiv. 2021.
  2021-02-018/11NoPatients who are male, obese, older, and have a history of smoking face higher risk of developing severe COVID-19; comorbidities that also explain a worse prognosis are hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cerebrovascular disease and chronic liver disease [Review of studies of moderate quality and heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherLi X, Zhong X, Wang Y, Zeng X, Luo T, Liu Q. Clinical determinants of the severity of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0250602. 
 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10YesAmong the 129 therapeutic options that have been studied in clinical trials, evidence shows that steroids, tocilizumab, REGEN-CoV, sotrovimab and baricitinib are the only alternatives that may have an effect on mortality and other clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients; remdesivir may improve time to symptom resolution, but its effects on other outcomes may be of small relevance, whereas more evidence is needed to confirm the early effects shown by colchicine, lenzilumab, tofacitinib and stem cells Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2020-12-109/11NoAmong the 59 therapeutic options found to treat COVID-19, corticosteroids probably significantly reduces mortality in severe or critical patients, whereas remdesivir is the safest option in terms of severe adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsDe Crescenzo F, Amato L, Cruciani F, Moynihan LP, Loreto D’Alò G, Vecchi S, et al. Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for Covid-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2021.
  Anti-virals2021-07-238/9 Yes [Azvudine] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Azvudine vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Baloxavir marboxil] The effects of adding baloxavir marboxil to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Baloxavir Marboxil vs standard care. 2020. 
  
2021-07-2310/11No [Baloxavir marboxil vs favipiravir] The effects of baloxavir marboxil compared with favipravir are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Baloxavir Marboxil. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11No[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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Baloxavir Marboxil vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir or Darunavir/Cobicistat + Umifenovir + Interferon-a. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11 No [Darunavir/cobicistat] The effects of adding darunavir/cobicistat to standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Darunavir/Cobicistat vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes (updated on 2021-03-03)[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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Favipiravir] Using favipiravir may not reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation, whereas it probably does not have an effect on time to symptom resolutionYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Favipiravir early vs late] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir early vs Favipiravir late. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11No [Favipiravir vs lopinavir + ritonavir] The effects of favipriavir compared with lopinavir + ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat + umifenovir + interferon-a are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir or Darunavir/Cobicistat + Umifenovir + Interferon-a. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Favipiravir vs tocilizumab] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Tocilizumab. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Favipiravir + tocilizumab vs tocilizumab] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Tocilizumab vs Favipiravir+Tocilizumab. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Favipiravir vs umifenovir] The benefits of favipiravir compared with umifenovir are uncertain while it may reduce adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes[Favipiravir + interferon beta-1b vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir+interferon beta-1b vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Favipiravir + hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsFavipiravir+Hydroxychloroquine vs Standard care. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Favipiravir vs chloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Chloroquine. 2021.
   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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-2310/11No [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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon + Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Novaferon. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir] Adding lopinavir + ritonavir to standard care makes little or no difference on mortality, and may have a slight effect on the incidence of clinical improvement or viral conversion, whereas it may not substantially increase adverse events
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2020-05-029/11 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Lopinavir + ritonavir] Using lopinavir + ritonavir probably does not reduce mortality and may not increase the severe adverse events in COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs ivermectin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs Lopinavir-Ritonavir. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir vs ribavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Ribavirin+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Lopinavir + ritonavir + rivabirin + interferon alpha vs rivabirin + interferon alpha] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ribavirin+Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Ribavirin+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs umifenovir] Among hospitalized patients, umifenovir may reduce adverse events compared with lopinavir + ritonavir, and its effects on other clinical outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11No[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs novaferon] The effects of lopinavir + ritinoavir compared to novaferon are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Novaferon vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Lopinavir + ritonavir + hydroxychloroquine vs sofosbuvir + hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychlrooquine+ Sofosbuvir vs Hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir + ritonavir. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Lopinavir + ritonavir vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1a vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1a] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a vs Standard Care. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Methisoprinol] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Methisoprinol vs Standard care. 2021.
   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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Remdesivir] in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, remdesivir probably reduces disease progression, probably makes little or no difference in mortality at 28 days and it may slightly increase clinical improvement; it probably does not increase the incidence of adverse events
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Remdesivir vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2020-12-077/10 Yes[Remdesivir] Remdesivir probably makes little or no difference in mortality, and may slightly reduce the need for ventilation, while it probably improves recovery and reduce adverse events in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsKaka AS, MacDonald R, Greer N, Vela K, Duan-Porter W,  Obley A, et al. Major update: Remdesivir for adults With COVID-19 : A living systematic review and meta-analysis for the American College of Physicians Practice Points. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2021;174(5):663-672. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Remdesivir 5 days vs Remdesivir 10 days. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Remdesivir] Using remdesivir may slightly reduce mortality and invasive ventilation, and it may improve time to symptom resolutionYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11
Yes
[Ribavirin + interferon-b-1b] The effects of adding ribavarin and interferon-b-1b to liponavir + ritonavir are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Lopinavir + Ritonavir + Ribavirin + Interferon-b-1b vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Ribavirin + lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon alpha vs lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon alpha] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Ribavirin+Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha vs Lopinavir+Ritonavir+Interferon alpha. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Sofosbuvir + daclatasvir + ribavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Sofosbuvir + Daclatasvir + Ribavirin vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir] Using sofosbuvir/daclatasvir may produce little or no difference in the incidence of clinical improvement, and its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Sofosbuvir] Using sofosbuvir alone or in combination with daclatasvir or ledipasvir may not have an effect on mortality or mechanical ventilation, whereas it probably does not affect time to symptom resolutionYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir] The effects of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir vs Standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Sofosbuvir + hydroxychloroquine vs lopinavir + ritonavir + hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under lopinavir + ritonavir + hydroxychloroquine vs sofosbuvir + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychlrooquine+ Sofosbuvir vs Hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir + ritonavir. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Tenofovir + emtricitabine] The effects of tenofovir + emtricitabine to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes[Triazavirin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Triazavirin vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes (last updated on 2020-11-16)[Umifenovir] The effects of adding umifenovir to standard care are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Umifenovir vs Standard Care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Umifenovir vs favipiravir] See comparison under favipiravir vs umifenovir
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Umifenovir. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Umifenovir vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under lopinavir + ritonavir vs umifenovirYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Azithromycin] The effects of azithromycin in mild and hospitalized COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Azithromycin vs Standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Azithromycin vs hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Azithromycin] The effects of adding azithromycin to hydroxychloroquine therapy are uncertain, and it may even slightly increase the serious adverse events Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Azithromycin vs lincomycin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Lincomycin vs Azithromycin. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine] In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine may not have an effect on clinical improvement and disease progression, while it may lead to an increase in adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Standard care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine vs vitamin C] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Vitamin C. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Clarithromycin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Clarithromycin vs standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 No [Chloroquine] Synthesis pending
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Chloroquine vs Standard Care. 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Chloroquine vs hydroxychloroquine] The effects of hydroxychloroquine compared to chloroquine are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs Chloroquine. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Chloroquine vs favipiravir] See comparison under anti-virals/favipiravir vs chloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Chloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Doxycycline + ivermectin vs ivermectin] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Ivermectine. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes[Doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Doxycycline + ivermectin] The effects of adding doxycycline + ivermectin to standard care are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs standard care. 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Using hydroxychloroquine probably has no effect on mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation and time to symptom resolution among COVID-19 patients, and some studies show an increase in mortalityYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Hydroxychloroquine] Hydroxychloroquine may not reduce mortality in mild and hospitalized patients, probably does not have an important effect on viral negative conversion (among mild outpatients), clinical improvement and disease progression (among hospitalized patients); it probably increases the risk of adverse events in hospitalized patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine vs standard care/placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Hydroxychloroquine vs ivermectin] The effects of using hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin in hospitalized COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Hydroxychloroquine vs febuxostat] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Febuxostat vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Hydroxychloroquine vs azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin vs hydroxychloroquine Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Standard care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin vs Ivermectin + doxycycline] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9No[Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin vs vitamin C] See comparison under azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine vs vitamin CYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Vitamin C. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2020-09-218/10No[Hydroxychloroquine] It is unlikely that in-hospital use of hydroxychloroquine would have beneficial effectsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-238/9No[Hydroxychloroquine vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir vs hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Hydroxychloroquine vs lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1a] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1a vs hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Hydroxycloroquine + favipiravir] See comparison under anti-virals/favipiravir + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsFavipiravir+Hydroxychloroquine vs Standard care. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Hydroxychloroquine vs vitamin C] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHydroxychloroquine vs Vitamin C. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Itraconazole] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Itraconazole vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes (updated on 2021-07-17)[Ivermectin] In mild outpatients or hospitalized patients, adding ivermectin to standard care may have no effect on mortality at 28 days, clinical improvement and disease progression, and it may not increase the risk of serious adverse events
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Ivermectin] The effects of using ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Ivermectin + doxycycline] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectinYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Ivermectin + doxycycline vs hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin] See comparison under doxycycline + ivermectin vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin+Doxycycline vs Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromycin. 2020.
   N/A (Protocol)n/aNo[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)ProtocolBenefits and harmsOrtiz-Muñoz L, Rada G. Ivermectin for COVID-19: a Living Systematic Review Protocol. PROSPERO 2020; CRD42020189554.
   2021-07-238/9No[Ivermectin vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir vs ivermectinYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs Lopinavir-Ritonavir. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Ivermectin vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under hydroxychloroquine vs ivermectinYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin vs hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Ivermectin 12 mg vs ivermectin 24 mg] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin 12 mg vs Ivermectin 24 mg. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Ivermectin 6 mg vs ivermectin 12 mg] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Ivermectin 12 mg vs Ivermectin 24 mg. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Levamisole] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Levamisole vs placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes[Lincomycin vs azithromycin] See comparison under azithromycin vs lincomycinYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lincomycin vs Azithromycin. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Niclosamide] The effects of using niclosamide to treat COVID-19 are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes (last updated on 2021-04-15)[Nitazoxanide] In patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, nitazoxanide probably slightly increases clinical improvement but its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Nitazoxanide vs placebo. 2020. 
  Anti-inflammatories
2021-07-237/9 Yes [Colchicine] Colchicine may reduce mortality at 28 days, and it makes little or no difference in clinical improvement; the safety and effects on other outcomes are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Colchicine] Using colchicine in recently diagnosed COVID-19 patients probably does not reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation and time to symptom resolutionYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes[Enisamium] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Enisamium vs Placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Trefoil factor 2(TFF2) + interferon kappa(IFN-k)] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 inhibitors2020-12-305/9No[Acalabrutinib] The effects of using BTK inhibitors (including acalabrutinib) for severe COVID-19 are currently uncertain [Review of mainly observational studies of low to moderate quality]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsStack M, Sacco K, Castagnoli R, Livinski AA, Notarangelo LD, Lionakis MS. BTK inhibitors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): A systematic review. Research Square. 2021.
   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. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Baricitinib + remdesivir vs remdesivir] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Baricitinib] Using baricitinib in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease probably reduces mortality and time to symptom resolutionYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2020-12-305/9No[Ibrutinib] The effects of using BTK inhibitors (including ibrutinib) for severe COVID-19 are currently uncertain [Review of mainly observational studies of low to moderate quality]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsStack M, Sacco K, Castagnoli R, Livinski AA, Notarangelo LD, Lionakis MS. BTK inhibitors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): A systematic review. Research Square. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Imatinib] The effects of using imatinib to treat COVID-19 are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   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. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [CIGB-325] The effects of using CIGB-325 are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. CIGB-325 vs standard care. 2020. 
  
2021-07-2310/11Yes[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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Tofacitinib] Tofacitinib may increase symptom resolution or improvement, while it may increase severe adverse events in hospitalized and severe COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
  Corticosteroids2021-07-2310/11Yes[Budesonide] The safety of using budesonide in mild COVID-19 patients is currently uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Budesonide vs standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Corticosteroids] Adding corticosteroids to standard care slightly reduces mortality and it may reduce disease progression; its effects on other outcomes are uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Corticosteroids vs Standard Care/Placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Dexamethasone vs methylprednisolone] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Methylprednisolone vs Dexamethasone. 2021.
   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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Corticosteroids] Low- or moderate-dose treatment with corticosteroids probably reduces mortality in severe COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Inhaled steroids] Using inhaled steroids may reduce hospitalization rates and improve time to symptom resolution, but their effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
  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.  
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Anakinra] The effects of anakinra for COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Anakinra] In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, it is uncertain whether anakinra have an effect on mortality and disease progression, while it may slightly increase clinical improvement; its safety outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Anakinra vs standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes (last updated on 2021-03-13)[Bamlanivimab] Bamlanivimab may make little or no difference in mortality and clinical improvement, and it may not increase the risk of serious adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. LY-CoV555 vs Placebo. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Bamlanivimab] Using bamlanivimab probably does not have an important effect on time to symptom resolution, and its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Bamlanivimab + etesevimab] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. LY-CoV555+LY-CoV016 vs placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Bacille Calmette-Guérin] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. BCG vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[RBD-specific polyclonal F(ab')2 fragments of equine antibodies] The effects of using INM005 in COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[INM005] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. INM005 vs placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Etesevimab + bamlanivimab] See comparison under bamlanivimab + etesevimabYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. LY-CoV555+LY-CoV016 vs placebo. 2021.
  
2021-07-2310/11Yes [Inferferon β-1a] The effects of using interferon β-1a to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Interferon β vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Inferferon β-1a] Using inferferon β-1a probably has no effect on COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Interferon β-1a (nebulized)] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Inhaled nebulised interferon beta-1a vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Interferon β-1b + rivabirin] See comparison under anti-virals/ribavirin +interferon-b-1b + lopinavir + ritonavir vs lopinavir + ritonavir
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)

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.
   2021-07-238/9No[Interferon-beta 1a high dose vs interferon-beta 1a low dose] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA.High dose Interferon-Beta 1a vs Low dose Interferon-Beta 1a. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Interferon-beta 1a vs interferon-beta 1b] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Interferon β-1b vs Interferon β-1a. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Interferon beta-1a + lopinavir + ritonavir vs lopinavir + ritonavir] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir vs Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Interferon beta-1a + lopinavir + ritonavir vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1a vs hydroxychloroquineYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Interferon beta-1a + lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir + interferon beta-1aYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Lopinavir-Ritonavir+Interferon beta-1a vs Standard Care. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Interferon gamma] The effects of adding interferon gamma to a interferon α-2b  therapy are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. Interferon α-2b + Interferon gamma+ vs Interferon α-2b. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Interferon kappa(IFN-k) + trefoil factor 2(TFF2)] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harms COVID NMA. IFN-κ plus TFF2 vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Itolizumab] The effects of adding itolizumab to standard care are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Itolizumab vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Lenzilumab] Using lenzilumab may reduce mortality and invasive ventilation rates in severe COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Macrilimumab] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Mavrilimumab vs placebo. 2021.
   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 
   2021-07-2310/11No[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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon + Lopinavir + Ritonavir vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11No[Novaferon vs lopinavir + ritonavir] See comparison under anti-virals/lopinavir + ritonavir vs novaferon
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Novaferon vs Lopinavir + Ritonavir. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Peginterferon lambda-1] Using peginterferon lamda-1 in COVID-19 patients may increase viral negative conversion, but its effects on mortality are uncertain; its uses are probably associated with an increase in adverse events, but this may not entail an increase in serious adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Peginterferon Lambda-1 vs placebo. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Recombinant super-compound interferon(RSIFN-co)] The effects of RSIFN-co compared to IFN-alpha are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. rSIFN-co vs IFN-alpha. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Regdanvimab] Using regdanvimab may improve time to symptom resolution, but its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Antibody cocktail REGN-COV2] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. REGN-COV2 vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[REGEN-COV] REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) probably reduces hospitalization and improves time to symptom resolution without increasing severe adverse events in patients with mild COVID-19Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Sarilumab] The effects of sarilumab for COVID-19 patients are uncertain, whereas it may slightly increase adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.  
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Sarilumab] Sarilumab may not reduce mortality and may reduce mechanical ventilation requirements without increasing severe adverse events in patients with severe COVID-19 diseaseYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 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.  
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Siltuximab] The effects of siltuximab for COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-2310/11 No [Tocilizumab] Among hospitalized patients, 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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Tocilizumab vs Standard care/Placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Sotrovimab] In patients with mild COVID-19 patients, sotrovimab probably reduces hospitalization and improves time to symptom resolution without increasing severe adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Tocilizumab] Using tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 disease reduces mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation, whereas it probably does not increase severe adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-02-049/11No[Tocilizumab] Tocilizumab reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation, while it probably does not decrease mortality, and probably reduces the risk of secondary infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsTleyjeh IM, Kashour Z, Riaz M, Hassett L, Veiga VC, Kashour T. Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients: A living systematic review and meta-analysis: First update. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2021. Epub ahead of print.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Tocilizumab + favirpiravir vs favipiravir] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harmsCOVID NMA.Favipiravir vs favipiravir+tocilizumab. 2020. 
   2021-07-23 8/9Yes [Tocilizumab vs favipiravir] See comparison under anti-virals/favipiravir vs tocilizumabYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Favipiravir vs Tocilizumab. 2020.
   2021-02-269/11 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.  
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Vilobelimab] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. IFX-1 vs standard care. 2020.
  Others2021-07-2310/11Yes [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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harmsCOVID NMA. a-Lipoic Acid vs Placebo. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9No[Amlodipine vs losartan] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Losartan vs Amlodipine. 2021.
   2020-07-316/6Yes[ACE inhibitors and ARB] No evidence was found evaluating the effects of using angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers for COVID-19 treatmentYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsMeza N, Pérez-Bracchiglione J, Pérez I, Carvajal C, Ortiz-Muñoz L, Olguín P, et al. Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers for COVID-19: A living systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Medwave. 2021;21(2):e8105.
   2021-07-238/9No [Aprepitant] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Aprepitant+Dexamethasone vs Dexamethasone. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Auxora] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Auxora vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Bromhexine] The effects of bromhexine are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms Rada G, Corbalan J, Rojas P. Cell-Based Therapies for COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review. MedRxiv 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Colony-stimulating factor] Adding recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to standard care may reduce mortality and increase adverse events Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Compound 21] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Compound 21 vs placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [C1 esterase inhibitor] The effects of adding C1 esterase/kallikrein inhibitor to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [C1 esterase inhibitor vs icatibant] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Dimethyl sulfoxide (DSMO)] The effects of using DSMO to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Enoxaparin] Using prophylactic anticoagulants may make little or no difference in clinical improvement, compared to therapeutic anticoagulants, and the differences on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Famotidine] The effects of famotidine for COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Febuxostat vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under other antimicrobials/hydroxychloroquine vs febuxostatYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Febuxostat vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9No[Finasteride] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsFinasteride vs standard care. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Fluvoxamine] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Fluvoxamine vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Icatibant] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs standard care. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Icatibant vs C1 esterase inhibitor] See comparison under C1 esterase inhibitor vs icatibantYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Icatibant vs C1 Esterase/Kallikrein inhibitor. 2020. 
   2021-07-238/9Yes[Leflunomide + interferon alpha2a vs interferon alpha2a] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Leflunomide + Interferon alpha2a vs Interferon alpha2a. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Losartan vs amlodipine] See comparison under amlodipine vs losartanYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Losartan vs Amlodipine. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Melatonin] The effects of using melatonin to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Metabolic cofactor] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Combined metabolic cofactor supplementation vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Neutral electrolyzed saline] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Neutral electrolyzed saline vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Oxygen-ozone] The effects of adding oxygen-ozone therapy to standard care are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Oxygen-ozone vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Pentoxifylline] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Pentoxifylline vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Progesterone] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Progesterone vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Prolectin-M] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Prolectin-M vs standard care. 2020.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Proxalutamide] Using proxalutamide may reduce mortality, mechanical ventilation, and may improve time to symptom resolution in COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Quercetin] The effects of using quercetin to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   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.  
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Stem cells] In hospitalized patients, human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell infusion may slightly increase the incidence of clinical improvement, and it may not increase adverse events; its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review
Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell infusion vs standard care/placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No [Sulodexide] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms
COVID NMA. Sulodexide vs placebo. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Telmisartan] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Vitamin C] Using vitamin C in COVID-19 patients may make little or no difference In reducing mortality, and its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-07-238/9No[Vitamin C + zinc] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Vitamin C+Zinc vs standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Vitamin C vs zinc] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Vitamin C vs Zinc. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Vitamin C + zinc vs zinc] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Zinc vs Vitamin C+Zinc. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Vitamin C vs hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under other antimicrobials/hydroxychloroquine vs vitamin CYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHydroxychloroquine vs Vitamin C. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Vitamin C vs azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine] See comparison under other antimicrobials/azithromycin + hydroxychloroquine vs vitamin CYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsHydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin vs Vitamin C. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11Yes [Vitamin D] The effects of using vitamin D are uncertain and it may increase adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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.
   2021-03-119/10Yes[Vitamin D] Vitamin D may reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in moderate to severe patients; its effects on other outcomes are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsStroehlein JK, Wallqvist J, Iannizzi C, Mikolajewska A, Metzendorf MI, Benstoem C, et al. Vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Rev.iews 2021;5:CD015043. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes[Zinc] The effects of using zinc in hospitalized COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Zinc vs standard care/placebo. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11 Yes [Zinc] The effects of adding zinc to hydroxychloroquine therapy are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc vs Hydroxychloroquine. 2020.
   2021-07-238/9No[Zinc vs vitamin C] See comparison under vitamin C vs zincYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Vitamin C vs Zinc. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Zinc + vitamin C vs vitamin C] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Vitamin C vs Vitamin C + zinc. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9No[Zinc + vitamin C] See comparison under vitamin C + zincYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Vitamin C+Zinc vs standard care. 2021.
 Blood products
        
  Convalescent plasma
2021-07-2310/11Yes In hospitalized patients, adding convalescent plasma to standard care probably does not have an effect on mortality at 28 days and clinical improvement, while it may make little or no difference in disease progression and it may slightly reduce mortality at 60 days; it may not increase serious adverse events, and it probably slightly increases the frequency of any adverse event
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Convalescent Plasma vs Standard Care. 2020. 
   2021-03-178/10Yes Convalescent plasma does not reduce mortality and has little or no difference in clinical improvement in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19; the incidence of adverse events is uncertain
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms Piechotta V, Iannizzi C, Chai KL, Valk SJ, Kimber C, Dorando E, et al. Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID‐19: A living systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.2021(5). 
   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.  
   2021-07-147/10YesUsing convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients does not reduce mortality, the need for mechanical ventilation or time to symptom resolution, and probably increases severe adverse eventsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2021-07-238/9Yes [Convalescent plasma vs fresh frozen plasma] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Convalescent plasma vs fresh frozen plasma. 2020. 
   2021-07-2310/11Yes The effects of using early vs deferred convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms COVID NMA. Early convalescent plasma vs deferred convalescent plasma. 2020. 
  Hyperimmune immunoglobulin2021-03-17
8/10YesNo completed trials have been found evaluating the effects of hyperimmune immunoglobulin for patients with COVID-19
Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsPiechotta V, Iannizzi C, Chai KL, Valk SJ, Kimber C, Dorando E, et al. Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID‐19: A living systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.2021(5). 
 Ventilation for COVID-19         
  Invasive ventilation 
2020-07-11
6/11 Yes A systematic review 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 checked on 2021-07-28)Full review Benefits and harms Thomas R, Lotfi T, Morgano GP, Darzi A, Reinap M, COVID-19 Systematic Urgent Review Group Effort (SURGE) Study Authors. Update alert 2: Ventiliation techniques and risk for transmission of coronavirus disease, including COVID-19. Annals of Internal Medicine 2020;L20-1211.
   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. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Thermal helium-oxygen mixture] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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.  
   2020-12-267/11NoIt is uncertain whether the timing of intubation might have an effect on mortality, length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation of critically ill patients with COVID-19 [Review of observational studies of moderate heterogeneity for some of the outcomes]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsPapoutsi E, Giannakoulis VG, Xourgia E, Routsi C, Kotanidou A, Siempos II. Effect of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized cohort studies. Crit Care. 2021;25(121). 
  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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the effects of postextubation high-flow nasal cannula on reintubation and postextubation respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients is currently being conductedNoProtocolBenefits and harmsDong Z & Yang L. Effect of postextubation high-flow nasal cannula on reintubation and postextubation respiratory failure in acute hypoxemic patients with COVID-19: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021236519
  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.
   2020-08-15
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 
   2020-11-098/11NoAlthough important heterogeneity was found among studies (given the unstandardized processes for proning), prone position of non-intubated adult patients showed a significant improvement in oxygenation parameters and respiratory rateNoFull reviewBenefits and harmsPonnapa Reddy M, Subramaniam A, Afroz A, Billah B, Lim ZJ, Zubarev A, Blecher G, Tiruvoipati R, Ramanathan K, Wong SN, Brodie D, Fan E, Shekar K. Prone Positioning of Nonintubated Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Critical Care Medicine. 2021.
  Other treatments for COVID-192021-07-238/9No[Inhaled nitric oxide] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsInhaled Nitric Oxide vs Standard care. COVID NMA; 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Stem cells] Mesenchymal stem cells transplantation may reduce mortality in severe to critical COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
  
2021-07-238/9No[Oxygen-ozone + probiotics] Synthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Oxygen-Ozone+Probiotics vs standard care. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10Yes[Probiotics] The effects of using probiotics to treat COVID-19 patients are uncertainYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
 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. 
   2020-06-2010/11YesProphylactic 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. 
   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. 
   2021-07-2310/11YesCompared to standard-dose prophylactic coagulation, using intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation may make little or no difference in terms of mortality and clinical improvement among hospitalized COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation. 2021.
   2021-07-2310/11YesCompared to prophylactic anticoagulants, using therapeutic anticoagulants probably makes little or no difference in clinical improvement, and it may not reduce disease progression among hospitalized COVID-19 patientsYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Therapeutic anticoagulant vs prophylactic anticoagulant. 2021.
   2021-07-147/10YesUsing intermediate or full dose of prophylactic anticoagulation probably does not have a difference in mortalityYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewBenefits and harmsPan American Health Organization. Ongoing Living Update of COVID-19 Therapeutic Options: Summary of Evidence. Rapid Review, 14 July 2021. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization. 2021.
   2020-10-287/11NoWhereas the incidence of ischemic stroke among all COVID-19 patients has been estimated at 1.76%, severe COVID-19 patients are at higher risks of developing ischemic stroke [Review of studies of moderate quality]NoFull reviewOtherLu Y, Zhao JJ, Ye MF, Li HM, Yao FR, Kong Y et al. The relationship between COVID-19's severity and ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Sci. 2021:1–7. 
  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. 
  Management of respiratory complications2020-08-01
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. 
   2021-07-238/9 Yes [Photobiomodulation therapy] Synthesis pending Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating COVID-19 associated primary spontaneous tension pneumothorax is currently being conductedNoProtocolOtherAhmed 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 
   2020-09-308/11NoDespite the use of anticoagulants in prophylactic dosage, pulmonary thromboembolism was estimated to be 11.1% among COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU [Review of studies of low to moderate quality with an important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherNg JJ, Liang ZC, Choon AMTL. The incidence of pulmonary thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A meta-analysis and meta-regression of observational studies. Journal of Intensive Care. 2021;9(1):20. 
  Management of other complications2020-05-155/10NoLimited evidence is available to evaluate whether COVID-19 could be an etiological factor in acute pancreatitis [Review of observational studies of low quality]NoFull reviewOtherFélix 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.
   2020-04-107/11NoThe 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 circumstancesNoFull reviewOtherDrozd 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. 
   2020-08-019/10NoDelirium 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]NoRapid reviewOtherHawkins 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;
   2020-08-316/11NoEvidence shows that most liver enzyme levels are not affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection (including transaminases and bilirrubin levels) [Review of observational studies and case reports of unknkown quality]NoFull reviewOtherBzeizi K, Abdulla M, Mohammed N, Alqamish J, Jamshidi N, Broering D. Effect of COVID-19 on liver abnormalities: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):10599. 
 Community-based treatment of COVID-19 and community-based home monitoring2020-04-02 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 therapies2020-07-27
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 (three medicines and three 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.
  2021-02-099/11YesChinese herbal medicine has benefits for reducing the rate of COVID-19 aggravation, but it may not have an effect on gastrointestinal symptoms and liver functionNoFull reviewBenefits and harmsShi S, Wang F, Li J, Li Y, Li W, Wu X et al. The effect of Chinese herbal medicine on digestive system and liver functions should not be neglected in COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. IUBMB Life. 2021;73(5):739-760.  
 Management of COVID-19 with a syndemic orientation2020-07-018/10NoEvidence shows that people who experienced restricted physical contact during the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased food consumption and modified eating styles [Review of studies mainly of moderate quality]NoFull reviewOtherNeira C, Godinho R, Rincón F, Mardones R, Pedroso J. Consequences of the COVID-19 ysndemic for nutritional health: A systematic review. Nutrients. 2021;13(4):1168.
Treatment of post-COVID-19 conditions        
 Treatment of long COVID-19 symptoms2021-07-238/9NoSynthesis pendingYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsCOVID NMA. Rehabilitation. 2020.
  2020-07-157/11NoImpaired 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]NoFull reviewOtherTorres-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/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the prevalence of long-term effects of COVID-19 and post COVID-19 syndrome among different populations is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-05-18)ProtocolOtherO'Mahoney L, Ekezie W, Pareek M, Brightling C, Davies M, Zaccardi F, et al. A living systematic review of the prevalence and long-term health effects of ongoing symptomatic COVID 19 and post COVID 19 syndrome among hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients by age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021238247
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review examining pre-existing autoimmune and allergic diseases as risk factors for long-COVID-19 symptoms is currently being conductedNoProtocolOtherHahne TM, Brushinski E, Drewitz KP, Grepmeier EM, Siegels D, Ossenbrink L, et al. Pre-existing autoimmune and allergic diseases as risk factors for Long-COVID symptoms: Protocol for a rapid review. PROSPERO. 2021;CRD42021247612.
  2020-09-156/9NoAlthough no evidence was found evaluating the effects of COVID-19 infection after 12 weeks, an important number of studies report that healthy adults between 18 to 50 years might be affected by long COVID-19 symptoms with multi-organ impact [Review of studies of variable quality]NoFull reviewOtherWilli S, Lüthold R, Hunt A, Hänggi NV, Sejdiu D, Scaff C, et al. COVID-19 sequelae in adults aged less than 50 years: A systematic review. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2021;40:101995. 
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the effects of traditional Chinese medicine for post-viral olfactory dysfunction is currently being conductedNoProtocolBenefits and harmsMa F, Zhang H, Li B, Cheng P, Ma Y, Yu M et al. The effect of traditional Chinese medicine treatment for post-viral olfactory dysfunction: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(16):e25536.  
  2021-02-208/11NoWhile neuropsychiatric symptoms are common after recovery from COVID-19, sleep disorders and fatigue are the most frequent (25% of the patients), followed by cognitive impairment, anxiety, post-traumatic symptoms, and depression  [Review of studies of low to moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherBadenoch JB, Rengasamy ER, Watson CJ, Jansen K, Chakraborty S, Sundaram RD et al. Persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms after COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021.
  2021-02-019/10NoA highly variable frequency of long COVID-19 symptoms has been found, whereas the most common persistent symptoms are chest pain, fatigue, dyspnea, cough and sputum productionNoFull reviewOtherCabrera Martimbianco AL, Pacheco RL, Bagattini ÂM, Riera R. Frequency, signs and symptoms, and criteria adopted for long COVID: A systematic review. Int J Clin Pract. 2021:e14357. 
 Treatment of multiorgan effects2020-07-316/9NoFever, 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 recoverNoFull reviewOtherKaushik 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.
  2020-08-206/11NoCases of COVID-19 multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children have a mean age of onset of 9.3 years, mostly in hispanic and black children, with fever,  gastrointestinal, dermatological or mucocutaneous symptoms being the most common; cardiovascular involvement, including myocardial disfunction was commonly reported [Review of studies of unknown quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherYasuhara J, Watanabe K, Takagi H, Sumitomo N, Kuno T. COVID-19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatric Pulmonology. 2021. 
  2020-09-156/9YesA systematic review of autopsy findings found evidence of abnormalities in multiple organs and systemsNoFull reviewOtherHammoud H, Bendari A, Bendari T, Bougmiza I. Histopathological findings in COVID-19 cases: A systematic review. medRxiv. 2020. 
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A systematic review evaluating pediatric massage therapy for restoring pediatric lung function from COVID-19 is currently being conductedNoProtocolBenefits and harmsZhou KL, Dong S, Wang K, Fu GB, Niu Y, Xue XN, et al. Pediatric massage therapy for restoring pediatric lung function from COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine. 2020;99(33):e21581.
  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 conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-05-18)ProtocolOtherCosta 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
  N/A (Protocol)n/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the prevalence and long-term effects of long COVID-19 symptoms (including multiorgan effects) by age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-06-07)ProtocolOtherO'Mahoney L, Ekezie W, Pareek M, Brightling C, Davies M, Zaccardi F, et al. A living systematic review of the prevalence and long-term health effects of ongoing symptomatic COVID 19 and post COVID 19 syndrome among hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients by age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021238247
  2020-07-015/9NoIncreasing evidence suggests that COVID-19 related cardiac injury could be triggered by the development of systemic hyperinflammation that is sometimes produced in response to the COVID-19 infection [Review of studies of unclear quality]NoFull reviewOtherSaed Aldien A, Ganesan GS, Wahbeh F, Al-Nassr N, Altarawneh H, Al Theyab L et al. Systemic inflammation may induce cardiac injury in COVID-19 patients including children and adolescents without underlying cardiovascular diseases: A systematic review. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2021:S1553-8389(21)00195-0. 
 Treatment of the effects of COVID-19 treatment or hospitalizationN/A (Protocol)n/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the prevalence and long-term effects of long COVID-19 symptoms among hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-06-07)ProtocolOtherO'Mahoney L, Ekezie W, Pareek M, Brightling C, Davies M, Zaccardi F, et al. A living systematic review of the prevalence and long-term health effects of ongoing symptomatic COVID 19 and post COVID 19 syndrome among hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients by age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021238247
  2020-10-227/11NoFatigue, dyspnoea, chest pain and cough were the most common symptoms found among survivors of hospital admission after COVID-19 infection [Review of studies of low to moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherCares-Marambio K, Montenegro-Jiménez Y, Torres-Castro R, Vera-Uribe R, Torralba Y, Alsina-Restoy X, et al. Prevalence of potential respiratory symptoms in survivors of hospital admission after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chronic Respiratory Disease. 2021. 
  2020-08-045/9NoPatients in prone position to treat COVID-19 could be at risk of developing pressure injuries when connected to a mechanical ventilator for long periods [Review of observational studies]NoFull reviewOtherYu J-N, Wu B-B, Feng L-P, Chen H-L. COVID-19 related pressure injuries in patients and personnel: A systematic review. Journal of Tissue Viability. 2021.
 Treatment of COVID-19 sequelae2021-04-307/11NoAn increasing number of rehabilitation research is being conducted to address post COVID-19 symptoms and sequelae, in response to an increased report of common post-COVID impairments [Review of studies of unknown quality]Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Rapid reviewOtherNegrini F, de Sire A, Andrenelli E, Lazzarini SG, Patrini M, Ceravolo MG; International Multiprofessional Steering Committee of Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action. Rehabilitation and COVID-19: Update of the rapid living systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field as of April 30th, 2021. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2021.
  2020-05-114/9NoEvidence 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]NoFull reviewOtherVishvkarma R & Rajender S. Could SARS-CoV-2 affect male fertility?. Andrologia. 2020;52(9):e13712. 
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[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)ProtocolOtherGordon 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/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the efficacy of using nintedanib for SARS-CoV-2 induced pulmonary fibrosis is currently being conductedYes (row content last updated on 2021-04-12)ProtocolBenfits and harmsNafea 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
  2020-11-015/9NoAlthough there are reported cases evaluating rare neurological manifestations of coronavirus infections in children, there is still very scarce evidence to better understand these sequelae [Review of studies of unknown quality including studies conducting during the COVID-19, MERS and SARS outbreaks]NoFull reviewOtherSinger TG, Evankovich KD, Fisher K, Demmler-Harrison GJ, Risen SR. Coronavirus infections in the nervous system of children: A scoping review making the case for long-term neurodevelopmental surveillance. Pediatric Neurology. 2021;117:47-63. 
  2020-11-018/11NoA positive association was found between pulmonary rehabilitation and lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life in interstitial lung disease patients (including COVID-19 patients)[Review of studies of variable quality conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and other coronaviruses]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsReina-Gutiérrez S, Torres-Costoso A, Martínez-Vizcaíno V, de Arenas-Arroyo SN, Fernández-Rodríguez R, Pozuelo-Carrascosa DP. Effectiveness of respiratory rehabilitation for the treatment of the sequelae produced by interstitial lung diseases similar to Covid-19. A systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021:S0003-9993(21)00326-9.  
  N/A (Protocol)n/aNo[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the effects of dance-based mind-motor activities on the quality of life in patients recovering from COVID-19 is currently being conductedNoProtocolBenefits and harmsDing Y, Guo C, Yu S, Zhang P, Feng Z, Sun J et al. The effect of dance-based mind-motor activities on the quality of life in the patients recovering from COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(11):e25102. 
  2021-02-208/11NoWhile neuropsychiatric symptoms are common after recovery from COVID-19, sleep disorders and fatigue are the most frequent (25% of the patients), followed by cognitive impairment, anxiety, post-traumatic symptoms, and depression  [Review of studies of low to moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherBadenoch JB, Rengasamy ER, Watson CJ, Jansen K, Chakraborty S, Sundaram RD et al. Persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms after COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv. 2021.
  2021-01-017/11NoThe occurrence of hearing loss, tinnitus, and dizziness have been associated with COVID-19 infection [Review of studies on low to moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherJafari Z, Kolb BE, Mohajerani MH. Hearing loss, tinnitus, and dizziness in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences. 2021:1-33.
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. 
  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. 
  2020-10-045/9NoEvidence that post-COVID-19 symptoms persist after infection has implications for postoperative care, suggesting surgeries may be delayed for at least 4 weeks after a positive COVID-19 test [Review of mainly low quality studies]NoRapid reviewOtherKovoor JG, Scott NA, Tivey DR, Babidge WJ, Scott DA, Beavis VS, Kok J, MacCormick AD, Padbury RTA, Hugh TJ, Hewett PJ, Collinson TG, Maddern GJ, Frydenberg M. Proposed delay for safe surgery after COVID-19. ANZ Journal of Surgery. 2021.
  2021-06-019/11NoAbout one in 20 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 suffered an in-hospital cardiac arrest with an important fatality rate, although this mortality is comparable to pre-pandemic rates for cardiac arrests patients [Review of studies of mainly moderate quality]NoFull reviewOtherLim ZJ, Reddy MP, Curtis JR, Afroz A, Billah B, Sheth V, et al. A systematic review of the incidence and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrests in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Critical Care Medicine. 2021. 
 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. 
  2020-12-1410/11NoPoorer survival of colorectal cancer patients has been found when delaying elective surgeries (in response to pandemic lockdowns or other contexts), particularly after 3 months [Review of observational studies of low to moderate quality with moderate heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsWhittaker TM, Abdelrazek MEG, Fitzpatrick AJ, Froud JLJ, Kelly JR, Williamson JS, et al. Delay to elective colorectal cancer surgery and implications for survival: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Disease. 2021. 
  2020-10-306/9NoImmunosuppression among kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 is managed as a tailored approach balancing the risk of COVID-19 complications and the risk of rejection or graft loss [Review of mainly case series and reports]NoFull reviewOtherAngelico R, Blasi F, Manzia TM, Toti L, Tisone G, Cacciola R. The management of immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 disease: An update and systematic review of the literature. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57(5):435. 
 Management of COVID-19 alongside other infectious diseasesN/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  
  2021-03-097/11NoThe prevalence of COVID-19 among people living with HIV/AIDS could range from 0.8 to 9.7%, while chronic kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension and chronic cardiac disease have been identified as factors explaining worse prognosis among these patients [Review of studies of low to moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherLiang M, Luo N, Chen M, Chen C, Singh S, Singh S et al. Prevalence and mortality due to COVID-19 in HIV co-infected population: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Dis Ther. 2021:1–19. 
  2021-04-044/11NoVariable estimates of pulmonary aspergillosis incidence among critically ill COVID-19 patients in the ICU have been reported (pool estimate 10%) [Review of studies of unknown quality and important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherMitaka H, Kuno T, Takagi H, Patrawalla P. Incidence and mortality of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mycoses. 2021. 
  2021-02-088/11NoCo-infection with other pathogens has been estimated in 19% of the patients with COVID-19 infection, while 24% of them had superinfection  [Review of studies of moderate quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherMusuuza JS, Watson L, Parmasad V, Putman-Buehler N, Christensen L, Safdar N. Prevalence and outcomes of co-infection and superinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0251170. 
  2020-09-239/11NoLimited evidence shows a lack of association between hepatitis B coinfection with COVID-19 and serious adverse eventsNoFull reviewOtherZhu JH & Peltekian KM. HBV coinfection and in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Liver Journal. 2021;4(1):16-22.
 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2020-07-158/11NoThe prevalence of cancer among COVID-19 patients was estimated at a very heterogenous 7%, with important variation across different geographical regions [Review of studies of variable quality and substantial heterogeneity]NoFull reviewOtherXiangyi K, Yihang Q, Junjie H, Zhao H, Zhan Z, Qin Z, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of global data. Cancer Letters. 2021;508:30-46.
   2020-10-056/11NoThe rates of depression and anxiety among patients receiving cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic is considerable [Review of studies of unclear quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherAyubi E, Bashirian S, Khazaei S. Depression and anxiety among patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2021:1–9. 
  Other conditions2020-10-09 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).  
   2020-07-125/9NoEvidence suggests that immunosuppressive therapy may not increase the risk of hospital mortality among solid organ transplant recipients with moderate and severe COVID-19 [Review of observational studies of unknown quality]NoFull reviewOtherKarruli A, Spiezia S, Boccia F, Gagliardi M, Patauner F, Salemme A, et al. Effect of immunosuppression maintenance in solid organ transplant recipients with coronavirus disease 2019: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Transplant Infectious Disease. 2021;e13595. 
 See assessing most important prognostic factors for prognostic reviews addressing drug treatment interruptions

  
        
 Burn-out and trauma in essential workers         
  Psychosocial support2021-07-05
5/11 No Clinical staff working in high-exposure roles may report higher rates of anxiety and depression compared to low-exposure roles, 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 checked on 2021-07-28)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/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; 
   2020-10-027/10NoEvidence shows that multi-factorial interventions (including informational support, instrumental support, organizational support, and emotional and psychological interventions) are best suited to address mental-health issues experienced by healthcare workers during infectious-disease outbreaks [Review of studies of variable quality conducted during the COVID-19, Ebola, AH1N1, and SARS outbreaks]NoFull reviewOtherZaçe D, Hoxhaj I, Orfino A, Viteritti AM, Janiri L, Di Pietro ML. Interventions to address mental health issues in healthcare workers during infectious disease outbreaks: A systematic review. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2021 Feb 13;136:319-333.
   2020-10-058/11NoHigher rates of poor mental-health outcomes (including anxiety, stress, depression, PTSD and insomnia) have been reported among nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies with moderate quality and important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherVarghese A, George G, Kondaguli SV, Naser AY, Khakha DC, Chatterji R. Decline in the mental health of nurses across the globe during COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Global Health. 2021;11:05009.
  Burn-out care2020-04-15
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 P, 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. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2021. 
   2020-09-306/10NoLimited evidence was found on interventions to reduce or prevent burnout and occupational stress and the effects these have on female healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies of unknown quality]NoRapid reviewOtherSriharan A, Ratnapalan S, Tricco AC, Lupea D. Women in health care experiencing occupational stress and burnout during COVID-19: A review. medRxiv. 2021. 
   2020-09-155/9NoSubstantial challenges from COVID-19 are experienced for people living with dementia and their families, such as partner fatigue and burnout, and confinement challenges [Review of studies of unknown quality]NoFull reviewOtherBacsu JR, O'Connell ME, Webster C, Poole L, Wighton MB, Sivananthan S. A scoping review of COVID-19 experiences of people living with dementia. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2021;112(3):400-411.
  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. 
   2020-11-156/11NoEvidence shows that the prevalence of immediate PTSD increased during the acute phase of the COVID-19 and SARS pandemics among healthcare professionals, and a number of factors have been identified as potential determinants [Review of studies conducted during the COVID-19 and SARS outbreaks]NoFull reviewOtherFalasi BA, Mazrouei MA, Ali MA, Dhamani MA, Ali AA, Kindi MA, et al. Prevalence and determinants of immediate and long-term PTSD consequences of coronavirus-related (CoV-1 and CoV-2) pandemics among healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(4):2182.
 Mental health and additions issues related to the pandemic response         
  Remote management of existing conditions2020-06-17 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. 
   2020-08-056/9NoWeak evidence suggested some efficacy or effectiveness of digital-health solutions to support women with addictions during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies of unknown quality conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and before]NoFull reviewOtherQuilty L, Buckley L, Coombs M, Kristy B-L, Agic B, Shakespeare J, et al. Digital health solutions to support women with addiction during COVID-19: Applying a gender- and trauma-informed lens. CIHR. 2020;
   2020-06-015/9NoLimited evidence shows that virtual-care interventions might have the potential to provide trauma-focused treatment to populations affected by domestic violence and sexual assault, particularly the provision of online psychological therapies [Review of studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and before]NoFull reviewOtherMontesanti S, Ghidei W, Silverstone P, Wells L. Examining the use of virtual care interventions to provide trauma-focused treatment to domestic violence and sexual assault populations. Edmonton, Alberta: CIHR. 2020;
   2021-03-228/10NoEvidence suggests that mental-health support using self-guided online interventions may effectively address mental-health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies of low to moderate quality]Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsBonardi O, Wang Y, Li K, Jiang X, Krishnan A, He C, et al. Effects of COVID-19 mental health interventions among community-based children, adolescents, and adults: A living systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Medrxiv. 2021. 
  Management of pandemic-related mental health conditionsN/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
NoRapid 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.  
   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 
   2020-10-198/10YesInconsistent estimates of the impact of COVID-19 on suicide rates have been reported across studies and countries, but some evidence shows a rise in community distress and frequency of suicidal thoughts in individuals infected with COVID-19 [Review of observational studies, mainly case series]Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewOther John A, Eyles E, Webb RT, Okolie C, Schmidt L, Arensman E, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: Update of living systematic review. F1000Research. 2021;9:1097. 
   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.
   2020-08-12
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.  
   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.
   2020-05-286/10NoEvidence suggests a beneficial effects of physical activity such as exercise and yoga at home to promote mental wellness during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of low quality studies mainly conducted in prison settings with unclear heterogeneity]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsPuyat JH, Ahmad H, Avina-Galindo AM, Kazanjian A, Gupta A, Ellis U, et al. A rapid review of home-based activities that can promote mental wellness during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0243125. 
   2020-05-168/10NoAlthough some studies report an association between previous infectious-disease related public-health emergencies and an increased risk of suicidal behavior and thoughts, the evidence is too uncertain to draw firm conclusions [Review of low-quality studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and before]NoFull reviewOtherZortea TC, Brenna CTA, Joyce M, McClelland H, Tippett M, Tran MM, et al. The impact of infectious disease-related public health emergencies on suicide, suicidal behavior, and suicidal thoughts. Crisis. 2020:1-14. 
   2021-03-228/10NoEvidence suggests that mental-health support using lay- or peer-delivered interventions may be an effective strategy to address mental-health issues in vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of studies of low to moderate quality]Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewBenefits and harmsBonardi O, Wang Y, Li K, Jiang X, Krishnan A, He C, et al. Effects of COVID-19 mental health interventions among community-based children, adolescents, and adults: A living systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Medrxiv. 2021. 
   2021-03-226/11NoNo consistent evidence was found suggesting mental health symptoms have worsened as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when comparing mental health prior to and during the pandemic [Review of studies with substantial heterogeneity among their findings]Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewOtherSun Y, Wu Y, Bonardi O, Krishnan A, He C, Boruff JT, et al. Comparison of mental health symptoms prior to and during COVID-19: Evidence from a living systematic review and meta-analysis. Medrxiv. 2021.
   2020-10-056/11NoThe rates of depression and anxiety among patients receiving cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic is considerable [Review of studies of unclear quality with important heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherAyubi E, Bashirian S, Khazaei S. Depression and anxiety among patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2021:1–9. 
   2020-09-155/9NoSubstantial challenges from COVID-19 are experienced for people living with dementia and their families, such as partner fatigue and burnout, and confinement challenges [Review of studies of unknown quality]NoFull reviewOtherBacsu JR, O'Connell ME, Webster C, Poole L, Wighton MB, Sivananthan S. A scoping review of COVID-19 experiences of people living with dementia. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2021;112(3):400-411.
 Reproductive care for patients with COVID-19         
  Antenatal careN/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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2020-06-01
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. 
   2020-09-217/11NoAnxiety and depression rates among pregnant women with COVID-19 have been estimated at 42% and 25%, respectively, although there is not enough evidence to compare these with rates in the pre-COVID-19 era [Review of studies of unknown quality and substantial heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherFan S, Guan J, Cao L, Wang M, Zhao H, Chen L, et al. Psychological effects caused by COVID-19 pandemic on pregnant women: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 2020;56:102533.
   2021-01-299/11NoEvidence suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and an increased risk of preeclampsia and stillbirth [Review of studies of moderate to high quality and moderate heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherWei SQ, Bilodeau-Bertrand M, Liu S, Auger N. The impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2021.
  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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2020-06-187/9YesLimited evidence showed that there was no additional risk associated with vaginal birth compared with caesarian section.NoFull 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. 
   2020-04-196/9NoEvidence shows that there might be an elevated risk of worse clinical outcomes and placental pathologies (including placental abruption and placental previa) among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection [Review of studies of variable quality]NoFull reviewOtherOltean I, Tran J, Lawrence S, Ruschkowski BA, Zeng N, Bardwell C, et al. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the clinical outcomes and placental pathology of pregnant women and their infants: A systematic review. Heliyon. 2021;7(3):e06393. 
   2021-01-299/11NoEvidence suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and an increased risk of preterm birth [Review of studies of moderate to high quality and moderate heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherWei SQ, Bilodeau-Bertrand M, Liu S, Auger N. The impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2021.
  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 
   2020-03-269/10NoIt is uncertain whether SARS-CoV-2 transmission via breast milk is possible, and the transmission via other breastfeeding-related fluids (i.e., blood, sweat, droplets) cannot be ruled outYes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)Full reviewOtherCenteno-Tablante E, Medina-Rivera M, Finkelstein JL, Rayco-Solon P, Garcia-Casal MN, Rogers L, et al. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through breast milk and breastfeeding: A living systematic review. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2020.
   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 checked on 2021-07-28)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 fetal and neonatal outcomes are uncertain Yes (row content last checked on 2021-07-28)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. 
   2020-05-08
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. 
   2021-01-299/11NoEvidence suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and an increased risk of NICU admission [Review of studies of moderate to high quality and moderate heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherWei SQ, Bilodeau-Bertrand M, Liu S, Auger N. The impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2021.
   2020-09-085/9NoInsufficient evidence has been found to support the possibility of vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 [Review of studies of unknown quality]NoFull reviewOtherTolu LB, Ezeh A, Feyissa GT. Vertical transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A scoping review. PLoS One. 2021;16(4):e0250196. 
  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. 
  N/A (Protocol)n/aYes[Protocol - results not yet available] A review evaluating the adherence to mediterranean diet during the COVID-19 era is currently being conductedNoProtocolOtherValle PGD, Nucci D, Bonaccio M, Gianfagna F, Iacoviello L, Odone A. Adherence to the mediterranean diet during the COVID-19 era: A systematic review of observational studies. PROSPERO. 2021; CRD42021232913
  2020-12-216/11NoEvidence shows that the first COVID-19 lockdown significantly increased population body weight [Review of studies of mainly moderate quality]NoFull reviewOtherBakaloudi DR, Barazzoni R, Bischoff SC, Breda J, Wickramasinghe K, Chourdakis M. Impact of the first COVID-19 lockdown on body weight: A combined systematic review and a meta-analysis. Clinical Nutrition. 2021.
  2020-11-286/9NoAlthough snacking behavior has increased for a proportion of the population during COVID-19 lockdowns, it is unclear if an observed decrease in fast-food consumption and the frequency of ordered food demonstrate an increase in the consumption of home-made foods [Review of studies of unclear heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherBakaloudi DR, Jeyakumar DT, Jayawardena R, Chourdakis M. The impact of COVID-19 lockdown on snacking habits, fast-food and alcohol consumption: A systematic review of the evidence. Clinical Nutrition. 2021.
  2020-07-018/10NoEvidence shows that people who experienced restricted physical contact during the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased food consumption and modified their eating styles [Review of studies mainly of moderate quality]NoFull reviewOtherNeira C, Godinho R, Rincón F, Mardones R, Pedroso J. Consequences of the COVID-19 ysndemic for nutritional health: A systematic review. Nutrients. 2021;13(4):1168.
 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. 
  2020-11-286/9NoHighly variable estimates among countries show that overall alcohol consumption has not significantly changed during COVID-19 lockdowns but there could be substantial variation among groups [Review of studies of unclear heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherBakaloudi DR, Jeyakumar DT, Jayawardena R, Chourdakis M. The impact of COVID-19 lockdown on snacking habits, fast-food and alcohol consumption: A systematic review of the evidence. Clinical Nutrition. 2021.
  2020-06-015/9NoAn increase in the use of tobacco products have been reported as a result of COVID-19 lockdowns, and alternative forms of delivering tobacco cessation programs have shown to be feasible [Review of studies of unlcear quality and substantial heterogeneity among their findings]NoFull reviewOtherNagi R, Reddy SS, Rakesh N, Vyas T. Tobacco cessation is a challenge during COVID-19 pandemic: Is it a good time to quit?: A systematic review. Journal of Indian Academy or Oral Medicine and Radiology. 2021;33(1):82-90 
 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. 
  2020-10-018/9NoEvidence shows that physical activity levels have been reduced and sedentary behaviours have increased during COVID-19 lockdowns [Review of studies of unclear quality]NoFull reviewOtherStockwell S, Trott M, Tully M, Shin J, Barnett Y, Butler L, et al. Changes in physical activity and sedentary behaviours from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown: A systematic review.  BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine. 2021;7(1). 
  2020-12-206/11NoEvidence has shown small to moderate effects of home-based exercise programmes in healthy older adults for health and skill related physical fitness [Review of studies of with substantial heterogeneity among their findings, and conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and before]NoFull reviewBenefits and harmsChaabene H, Prieske O, Herz M, Moran J, Höhne J, Kliegl R, et al. Home-based exercise programmes improve physical fitness of healthy older adults: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis with relevance for COVID-19. Ageing Research Reviews. 2021;67:101265. 
  2020-07-257/10NoConsistent negative associations have been found between physical activity levels and depression and anxiety rates during the COVID-19 pandemic [Review of observational studies of moderate quality]NoRapid reviewOtherWolf S, Seiffer B, Zeibig J-M, Welkerling J, Brokmeier L, Atrott B, et al. Is physical activity associated with less depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic? A rapid systematic review. Sports Medicine. 2021.
 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. 
  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.