Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Patients affected by COVID-19 should be treated according to the severity of their disease. However, not all key national or international organisations define severity in the same way. This imprecision in severity assessment compromises the validity of some therapeutic recommendations. Using individual patient data would better guide and improve therapeutic recommendations for COVID-19.

Two health care workers in PPE on a ward

WHO's guidelines for the treatment of COVID-19 are based on the combined analyses of published randomised control trials (RCTs), using statistical methods that allow for the comparison of various treatments between studies.

IDDO researchers reviewed 81 studies included in the WHO COVID-19 analysis and compared their severity classifications with those used by another international COVID network. The two were the same in only 35% of trials. Of the RCTs evaluated, 69% were considered by the WHO group to include patients with a range of severities. The distribution of disease severities within these groups usually could not be determined, and data on the duration of illness and/or oxygen saturation values were often missing.

The published literature contains a wide variety of COVID-19 severity threshold criteria, definitions and categories. Many of these are arbitrary and to add to the confusion, during the course of the pandemic some of the definitions were changed. Often, the key measures of severity were not reported at all and when they were, they were frequently incomplete or ambiguous.

This imprecision in severity assessment compromises the validity of some therapeutic recommendations. Crucially, it shows that the extrapolation of “lack of therapeutic benefit” shown in hospitalised severely-ill patients on respiratory support to ambulant, mildly-ill patients should not be done. To address these issues, the researchers recommend using individual patient data (IPD) to guide and improve therapeutic recommendations for COVID-19.

The full story is available on the IDDO website

Read the publication 'Definitions matter: Heterogeneity of COVID-19 disease severity criteria and incomplete reporting compromise meta-analysis' on the PLOS website

Similar stories

FORESFA and VIE project meetings

The Medicine Quality Research Group organised a multidisciplinary hybrid meeting at Keble College, Oxford, July 3 to 6, for the FORESFA project ‘Forensic epidemiology and impact of substandard and falsified antimicrobials on public health’, funded by a Wellcome Collaborative Award.

MORU hepatitis work focusses on preventing mother-to-child transmission, high-at-risk populations, and remote communities

MORU Tropical Health Network researchers in Southeast Asia study various aspects of hepatitis B and C, infections that can lead to chronic liver diseases, and complications like liver cancer or cirrhosis. Researchers at MOCRU work on treatment for hepatitis C, a frequent opportunistic infection in HIV patients. MORU’s Clinical Pharmacology conducts two trials on possible treatments of hepatitis C. Hepatitis B is frequently transmitted from mother to child at birth, and SMRU researchers study mothers’ knowledge and behaviour, as well as prevention.

A multi-country study of monkeypox being launched – first cases enrolled in Geneva

Researchers have launched a new study to improve our understanding of monkeypox disease. The first patients have now been recruited at Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève (HUG) in Switzerland

Pandemic Sciences Institute formally launched in Oxford

The University of Oxford’s Pandemic Sciences Institute (PSI) has been formally launched at a two-day event at the Blavatnik School of Government, at which the lead researchers set out its direction and strategy for the next five years.The PSI will draw together academics and experts from across the University to build a multi-disciplinary institute focused on reducing the risk from infectious threats through science, innovation and building global preparedness.

Field evaluation of EasyScan GO: a digital malaria microscopy device

Microscopic examination of Giemsa-stained blood films is key to quantifying and detecting malaria parasites but there can be difficulties in ensuring both a high-quality manual reading and inter-reader reliability. The EasyScan GO was developed as a potential solution to this, a microscopy device using machine-learning-based image analysis for automated parasite detection and quantification.

Registration is open for The Global Health Network Conference 2022

To tackle disease we need evidence to be generated through every type of health research study. This conference aims to bring together health research teams, organisations, health-workers, policy makers and practitioners to explore together how health research can be embedded into every healthcare setting. Join us at The Global Health Network Conference 2022 at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, 24 – 25 November 2022