Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35967398›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2022

The efficiency of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Zhenbei Qian, Zhijin Zhang, Haomiao Ma, Shuai Shao, Hanyujie Kang, Zhaohui Tong

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The Importance of Geographic Proximity of Convalescent Plasma Donors.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Coronavirus Disease-2019 in Pregnancy.Clinics in chest medicine · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhenbei QianDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhijin ZhangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Haomiao MaDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Shuai ShaoDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Hanyujie KangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhaohui TongDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Capital Medical University · CNBeijing Chao-Yang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess whether convalescent plasma therapy could offer survival advantages for patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). An electronic search of Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library and MedRxiv was performed from January 1st, 2020 to April 1st, 2022. We included studies containing patients with COVID-19 and treated with CCP. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers and synthesized with a random-effect analysis model. The primary outcome was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, ventilation-free days, 14-d mortality, improvements of symptoms, progression of diseases and requirements of mechanical ventilation. Safety outcomes included the incidence of all adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool 2.0 was used to assess the potential risk of bias in eligible studies. The heterogeneity of results was assessed by I^2 test and Q statistic test. The possibility of publication bias was assessed by conducting Begg and Egger test. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method were used for quality of evidence. This study had been registered on PROSPERO, CRD42021273608. 32 RCTs comprising 21478 patients with Covid-19 were included. Compared to the control group, COVID-19 patients receiving CCP were not associated with significantly reduced 28-d mortality (CCP 20.0% vs control 20.8%; risk ratio 0.94; 95% CI 0.87-1.02; p = 0.16; I² = 8%). For all secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between CCP group and control group. The incidence of AEs (26.9% vs 19.4%,; risk ratio 1.14; 95% CI 0.99-01.31; p = 0.06; I² = 38%) and SAEs (16.3% vs 13.5%; risk ratio 1.03; 95% CI 0.87-1.20; p = 0.76; I² = 42%) tended to be higher in the CCP group compared to the control group, while the differences did not reach statistical significance. In all, CCP therapy was not related to significantly improved 28-d mortality or symptoms recovery, and should not be viewed as a routine treatment for COVID-19 patients. Trial registration number: CRD42021273608. Registration on February 28, 2022. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42022313265.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 SerotherapyHumansImmunization, PassiveLength of StayRespiration, Artificialantibodiesconvalescent plasmaCOVID-19mortalitypassive immunizationSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35967398
PMCPMC9366612
OpenAlexW4288080436

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.