Search results

No comprehensive statistical assessment of publication bias has been conducted in remdesivir-based intervention research for COVID-19 patients. This study aims to examine all meta-analyses of the efficacy of remdesivir interventions in COVID-19 patients and perform a statistical assessment of publication bias.

This is an analytic study conducted to assess the impact of publication bias on the results of meta-analyses of remdesivir-based interventions in patients infected with COVID-19. All English full-text meta-analyses published in peer-reviewed journals in 2019–2021 were included. A computerized search of PubMed and Web of Science electronic databases was performed on December 24, 2021. The trim-and-fill method calculated the number of missing studies and the adjusted cumulative effect sizes.

The final analysis comprised 21 studies with 88 outcomes. The investigation revealed missing studies in 46 outcomes (52%). Seventy-six missing studies were replaced in the outcomes using the trim-and-fill procedure. The adjusted recalculated effect sizes of the 27 outcomes increased by an average of 0.04. In comparison, the adjusted effect size of 18 outcomes fell by an average of 0.036. Only 14 out of 46 outcomes with publication bias were subjected to a gray literature search (30%). To discover related research, no gray literature search was conducted in most outcomes with publication bias (n = 32; 70%). In conclusion, the reported effect estimates regarding the effect of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients are only slightly affected by publication bias and can be considered authentic. Health-care decision-makers in COVID-19 should consider current research results when making clinical decisions.

Most health decisions are based on the effect sizes revealed in meta-analyses. When deciding on remdesivir-based treatment for COVID-19 patients, therefore, the outcomes of this investigation may be of paramount importance to health policymakers, leading to better treatment strategies.

According to the results, no major publication bias and missing studies were detected on average. Therefore, the calculated effect sizes of remdesivir-based interventions on meta-analyses can be used as authentic and unbiased benchmarks by health-care decision-makers in treating patients with COVID-19.

This is the first study to examine the effect of publication bias and gray literature searches on the results of meta-analyses of treatment with COVID-19 (remdesivir).

The use of social media is one of the new technological options that has been recommended as a potential new strategy for delivering high-quality, high-value cancer prevention and management services. Despite the increasing use of social media, little research has been done on the use of social media in brain tumors. Therefore, this systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive review of the use of social media in brain tumor research.

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science from inception to August 1, 2022. English full-text articles evaluating social media use, benefit or content in brain tumor were considered.

Sixteen documents satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Most of the included studies (n = 11/16) were conducted and published by researchers in the USA. In terms of social media platform, most studies focused on Twitter (8/16, 50%) and YouTube (8/16, 50%), followed by Facebook (6/16, 37.5%) and Instagram (4/16, 25%). Most studies (n = 7/12) analyzed the content of brain tumor information provided on social media, followed by patients’ use of social media (n = 3/12) and the quality of information on social media (n = 3/12). The other three articles also examined patient recruitment, crowdfunding and caregiver use of social media.

By identifying the use, benefits and content of social media platforms in different settings, patients, clinicians and policymakers can better benefit from harnessing the power of social media in different ways, leading to improved health-care services.

To the authors knowledge, this is the first study to systematically examine social media use, benefits and content status in brain tumors.