We have written seven rapid evidence reviews to assist healthcare professionals with their decision-making.

At the start of the UK response to the pandemic, there were many uncertainties regarding how best to identify, manage and treat patients with COVID-19. During this rapidly evolving situation, local and national medical staff at the frontline asked the Newcastle MIC for help with identifying lessons learned from other countries in order to inform their decision-making.

Action

We responded promptly to this demand through translating and evaluating national and global guidelines and scrutinising the latest reports and publications.

We collaborated across the country with four universities, three NHS trusts, Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd and the NIHR Community Healthcare MIC.

This resulted in the production of seven rapid evidence reviews.

They were published by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine COVID-19 Evidence Service, hosted by Oxford University.

Results

The seven rapid evidence reviews examined:

1. the appropriateness and effectiveness of existing tests for diagnosing COVID-19. Read more.
2. what medical tests provide the best insight when a patient with suspected COVID-19 has an inconclusive diagnosis. Read more.
3. The pros and cons of different technologies that are used in COVID-19 testing. Read more. 
4. specific clinical characteristics that may predict the likelihood of survival in patients with COVID-19. Read more.
5. using multiple tests as a benchmark when evaluating new diagnostic tests for COVID-19. Read more.
6. whether individuals with asthma have an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 and developing severe disease. Read more.
7. specific questions posed by the World Health Organisation on the effects of COVID-19 in people with asthma. Read more.

Impact

• The reviews have had over 1300 engagements on Twitter.
• Two of our reviews were within the top 30 most viewed of their 263 articles, based on April – July analytics.
• They have impacted research at a global level receiving 17 citations so far.
• The articles have informed our further COVID-19 research including our work within the national CONDOR platform.