A rapid research needs appraisal methodology to identify evidence gaps to inform clinical research priorities in response to outbreaks-results from the Lassa fever pilot

Standard of care for viral haemorrhagic fevers (VHFs): a systematic review of clinical management guidelines for high-priority VHFs

The Sudan virus disease outbreak in Uganda in 2022 showed our vulnerability to viral haemorrhagic fevers (VHFs). Although there are regular outbreaks of VHFs with high morbidity and mortality, which disproportionally affect low-income settings, our understanding of how to treat them remains inadequate. In this systematic review, we aim to explore the availability, scope, standardisation, and quality of clinical management guidelines for VHFs. We identified 32 guidelines, 25 (78%) of which were low quality and did not have supporting evidence and eight (25%) of which had been produced or updated in the past 3 years. Guidance on supportive care and therapeutics had little detail and was sometimes contradictory. Guidelines based on uncertain evidence are a risk to patients, an ethical challenge for clinicians, and a challenge to implementing trials due to heterogeneous standards of care. We recommend a standard living guideline framework to improve the quality, scope, and applicability of guidelines. Furthermore, investments into trials should aim to identify optimal treatment strategies for VHFs and prioritise affordable and scalable interventions to improve outcomes globally.

Accessibility, inclusivity, and implementation of COVID-19 clinical management guidelines early in the pandemic: a global survey

Background: With a rapidly changing evidence base, high-quality clinical management guidelines (CMGs) are key tools for aiding clinical decision making and increasing access to best available evidence-based care. A rapid review of COVID-19 CMGs found most lacked methodological rigour, overlooked at-risk populations, and varied in treatment recommendations. Furthermore, social science literature highlights the complexity of implementing guidelines in local contexts where they were not developed and the resulting potential to compound health inequities. This study aimed to evaluate access to, inclusivity of, and implementation of COVID-19 CMGs in different settings. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of clinicians worldwide was conducted from 15th June to 20th July 2020, to explore access to and implementation of COVID-19 CMGs, and treatment and supportive care recommendations provided. Data on accessibility, inclusivity, and implementation of CMGs were analysed by geographic location. Results: 76 clinicians from 27 countries responded: 82% from high-income countries, 17% from lower middle-income countries (LMICs). Most respondents reported access to COVID-19 CMGs and confidence in their implementation. However, many respondents, particularly from LMICs, reported barriers to implementation, including limited access to treatment and equipment. Only 20% of respondents reported having access to CMGs covering care for children, 25% for pregnant women, and 50% for older adults (>65 years). Identified themes were for CMGs to include recommendations for at-risk populations and settings, include supportive care guidance, and be updated as evidence emerges, and for clinicians to have training and access to recommended treatments to support implementation. Conclusion: Our findings highlight important gaps in COVID-19 CMG development and implementation challenges during a pandemic, particularly affecting at-risk populations and lower resourced settings. This study identifies an urgent need for an improved CMG development framework that is inclusive and adaptable to emerging evidence and considers contextual implementation support, to improve access to evidence-based care globally.

A scoping review on research agendas to enhance prevention of epidemics and pandemics in Africa

Introduction

research is not only needed to prioritise the best possible response during an epidemic and pandemic, it is also understood to be a core pillar of outbreak response. However, few African countries are equipped to perform the needed surveillance and research activities during an outbreak. Therefore, we mapped out research agendas aimed at increased research preparedness towards epidemics or pandemics in Africa.

Methods

eligible studies were searched for in in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Additionally, grey literature was sought in Google, citation searches, as well as targeted sites such as the World Health Organization (WHO), Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, African Union, and the Wellcome Trust. Searches were done in March 2020.

Results

the electronic searches yielded 7344 records, of which 34 articles were included in the study. The studies identified around 18 factors highlighted through various research agendas. Majority of the research agendas spoke to general epidemic preparedness and focused largely on understanding virus transmission such as its characteristics and dynamics, and the infrastructure needed to carry out vital research activities.

Conclusion

the review highlights the research needs in order to carry out vital research work but to also bridge knowledge gaps and harmonize outbreak response from key stakeholders. However, Africa needs to create its own health research agendas and capacitate itself to conduct and lead these studies. African health research decisions must center on Africa, with African researchers taking the lead not only on the science produced but ensuring inclusive and equitable involvement from fellow researchers, and in engaging national health ministries as well as the communities.

Development of Rapid Advice Guidelines for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 with Traditional Chinese Medicine

The worldwide spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus has become a profound threat to human health. As the use of medication without established effectiveness may result in adverse health consequences, the development of evidence-based guidelines is of critical importance for the clinical management of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This research presents methods used to develop rapid advice guidelines on treating COVID-19 with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). We have followed the basic approach for developing WHO rapid guidelines, including preparing, developing, disseminating and updating each process. Compared with general guidelines, this rapid advice guideline is unique in formulating the body of evidence, as the available evidence for the treatment of COVID-19 with TCM is from either indirect or observational studies, clinical first-hand data together with expert experience in patients with COVID-19. Therefore, our search of evidence not only focuses on clinical studies of treating COVID-19 with TCM but also of similar diseases, such as pneumonia and influenza. Grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) methodology was adopted to rate the quality of evidence and distinguish the strength of recommendations. The overall certainty of the evidence is graded as either high, moderate, low or very low, and to give either “strong” or “weak” recommendations of each TCM therapy. The output of this paper will produce the guideline on TCM for COVID-19 and will also provide some ideas for evidence collection and synthesis in the future development of rapid guidelines for COVID-19 in TCM as well as other areas.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the epidemiology of Lassa virus in humans, rodents and other mammals in sub-Saharan Africa

Accurate data on the Lassa virus (LASV) human case fatality rate (CFR) and the prevalence of LASV in humans, rodents and other mammals are needed for better planning of actions that will ultimately reduce the burden of LASV infection in sub-Saharan Africa. In this systematic review with meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Africa Journal Online, and African Index Medicus from 1969 to 2020 to obtain studies that reported enough data to calculate LASV infection CFR or prevalence. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently. We extracted all measures of current, recent, and past infections with LASV. Prevalence and CFR estimates were pooled using a random-effect meta-analysis. Factors associated with CFR, prevalence, and sources of between-study heterogeneity were determined using subgroup and metaregression analyses. This review was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020166465. We initially identified 1,399 records and finally retained 109 reports that contributed to 291 prevalence records from 25 countries. The overall CFR was 29.7% (22.3-37.5) in humans. Pooled prevalence of LASV infection was 8.7% (95% confidence interval: 6.8-10.8) in humans, 3.2% (1.9-4.6) in rodents, and 0.7% (0.0-2.3) in other mammals. Subgroup and metaregression analyses revealed a substantial statistical heterogeneity explained by higher prevalence in tissue organs, in case-control, in hospital outbreak, and surveys, in retrospective studies, in urban and hospital setting, in hospitalized patients, and in West African countries. This study suggests that LASV infections is an important cause of death in humans and that LASV are common in humans, rodents and other mammals in sub-Saharan Africa. These estimates highlight disparities between sub-regions, and population risk profiles. Western Africa, and specific key populations were identified as having higher LASV CFR and prevalence, hence, deserving more attention for cost-effective preventive interventions.