A growing body of literature on the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is becoming available, but a synthesis of available data has not been conducted. We performed a scoping review of currently available clinical, epidemiological, laboratory, and chest imaging data related to the SARS-CoV-2 infection. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus and LILACS from 01 January 2019 to 24 February 2020. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted using the clinical and laboratory data, and random-effects models were applied to estimate pooled results. A total of 61 studies were included (59,254 patients). The most common disease-related symptoms were fever (82%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 56%–99%; n = 4410), cough (61%, 95% CI 39%–81%; n = 3985), muscle aches and/or fatigue (36%, 95% CI 18%–55%; n = 3778), dyspnea (26%, 95% CI 12%–41%; n = 3700), headache in 12% (95% CI 4%–23%, n = 3598 patients), sore throat in 10% (95% CI 5%–17%, n = 1387) and gastrointestinal symptoms in 9% (95% CI 3%–17%, n = 1744). Laboratory findings were described in a lower number of patients and revealed lymphopenia (0.93 × 10⁹/L, 95% CI 0.83–1.03 × 10⁹/L, n = 464) and abnormal C-reactive protein (33.72 mg/dL, 95% CI 21.54–45.91 mg/dL; n = 1637). Radiological findings varied, but mostly described ground-glass opacities and consolidation. Data on treatment options were limited. All-cause mortality was 0.3% (95% CI 0.0%–1.0%; n = 53,631). Epidemiological studies showed that mortality was higher in males and elderly patients. The majority of reported clinical symptoms and laboratory findings related to SARS-CoV-2 infection are non-specific. Clinical suspicion, accompanied by a relevant epidemiological history, should be followed by early imaging and virological assay.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the risk factors associated with suicidal behavior and thus, prioritizing its prevention is recommended. Methods: This study systematically reviewed the global evidence on the incidence of suicide/suicidal attempts and the trend in suicidal rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cross-sectional and cohort studies investigating the outcomes of suicidal death and suicidal attempts at any setting during the COVID-19 pandemic were searched in Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO databases for papers published from December 2019 to May 2021. Results: Out of 1052 studies18 studies with 12,746 suicidal attempts and 33,345 suicidal deaths were included in the final analysis. The mental health impact of social distancing, COVID-19 quarantine, and financial crises due to loss of employment were associated risk factors with suicide and/or suicidal attempts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Six common thematic recommendations for preventing suicidal deaths and suicidal attempts were identified. Conclusions: Unexpected behavior changes during the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the increasing trend of suicidal attempts reported. Domestic conflicts and violence, financial loss, anxiety and depression, and pre-existing mental health condition/s should be considered in preventing suicidal attempts and deaths secondary to the COVID 19 pandemic. Early detection and timely intervention for individuals with suicidal behavior is crucial and collated recommendations in the current study can be utilized for those preventive interventions. More systematic suicide risk screening process should be introduced who are at risk, along with an evidence base prevention approach.

Background: Navigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is challenging, and ongoing critical appraisal of this output is essential. We aimed to summarize and critically appraise systematic reviews of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in humans that were available at the beginning of the pandemic. Methods: Nine databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Sciences, PDQ-Evidence, WHO’s Global Research, LILACS, and Epistemonikos) were searched from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2020. Systematic reviews analyzing primary studies of COVID-19 were included. Two authors independently undertook screening, selection, extraction (data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, diagnostic test assessment, laboratory, and radiological findings), and quality assessment (AMSTAR 2). A meta-analysis was performed of the prevalence of clinical outcomes. Results: Eighteen systematic reviews were included; one was empty (did not identify any relevant study). Using AMSTAR 2, confidence in the results of all 18 reviews was rated as “critically low”. Identified symptoms of COVID-19 were (range values of point estimates): fever (82–95%), cough with or without sputum (58–72%), dyspnea (26–59%), myalgia or muscle fatigue (29–51%), sore throat (10–13%), headache (8–12%) and gastrointestinal complaints (5–9%). Severe symptoms were more common in men. Elevated C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase, and slightly elevated aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, were commonly described. Thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of procalcitonin and cardiac troponin I were associated with severe disease. A frequent finding on chest imaging was uni- or bilateral multilobar ground-glass opacity. A single review investigated the impact of medication (chloroquine) but found no verifiable clinical data. All-cause mortality ranged from 0.3 to 13.9%. Conclusions: In this overview of systematic reviews, we analyzed evidence from the first 18 systematic reviews that were published after the emergence of COVID-19. However, confidence in the results of all reviews was “critically low”. Thus, systematic reviews that were published early on in the pandemic were of questionable usefulness. Even during public health emergencies, studies and systematic reviews should adhere to established methodological standards.

New evidence on the COVID-19 pandemic is being published daily. Ongoing high-quality assessment of this literature is therefore needed to enable clinical practice to be evidence-based. This review builds on a previous scoping review and aimed to identify associations between disease severity and various clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus and LILACS for studies published between January 1, 2019 and March 22, 2020. Clinical studies including ≥10 patients with confirmed COVID-19 of any study design were eligible. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A quality effects model was used for the meta-analyses. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity. For hospitalized patients, studies were ordered by overall disease severity of each population and this order was used as the modifier variable in meta-regression. Overall, 86 studies (n = 91,621) contributed data to the meta-analyses. Severe disease was strongly associated with fever, cough, dyspnea, pneumonia, any computed tomography findings, any ground glass opacity, lymphocytopenia, elevated C-reactive protein, elevated alanine aminotransferase, elevated aspartate aminotransferase, older age and male sex. These variables typically increased in prevalence by 30–73% from mild/early disease through to moderate/severe disease. Among hospitalized patients, 30–78% of heterogeneity was explained by severity of disease. Elevated white blood cell count was strongly associated with more severe disease among moderate/severe hospitalized patients. Elevated lymphocytes, low platelets, interleukin-6, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and D-dimers showed potential associations, while fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, consolidation and septal thickening showed non-linear association patterns. Headache and sore throat were associated with the presence of disease, but not with more severe disease. In COVID-19, more severe disease is strongly associated with several clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics. Symptoms and other variables in early/mild disease appear non-specific and highly heterogeneous. Clinical Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020170623.

Background: Whilst people of all ages are affected in some way by COVID-19 virus, older people are at a high mortality risk. This study aimed to systematically review the numerous factors associated with mortality among COVID-19 infected older people. Method: PubMed and Science Direct were searched from inception to the April 15, 2021. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement and Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: Of the 4957 studies identified, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis, while 10 were included in the quantitative analysis. Male sex (OR = 2.22, 95% CI = 1.23–3.99), age (over 75 years old) (OR = 3.36, 95% CI = 2.30–4.90), Dementia (OR = 3.69, 95% CI = 1.99–6.83) and Dyspnoea (OR = 3.16, 95% CI = 2.61–3.82), were found to be significantly associated with mortality. There is no significant association between Diabetes, or Hypertension. Conclusion: Older age, male gender, dyspnoea and dementia were associated with a greater risk of death of older people from COVID-19 infection. These findings may help health care professionals to identify high-risk groups, facilitate appropriate remedial measures, and control mortality among older people.