ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM,
BRIANAJACKSON
As scientists led initial investigations into the novel coronavirus last winter and spring, journal publishers saw an enormous surge in COVID-19 publications. A study published January 4 in BMC Medical Research Methodology reports that the majority of early clinical studies on the pandemic lacked original data, and those that did were rushed and did not include the appropriate measures to reduce bias.
The researchers evaluated more than 10,000 COVID-19–related medical papers published in English or Chinese before May 2020. Among peer-reviewed papers, the researchers found that 56.1 percent were opinions that did not contain any new data. Original articles that included patient data represented only 9.6 percent of the peer-reviewed studies. The researchers then evaluated the quality of research of the original articles using validated tools to assess study design and concluded that 80 percent were at risk of bias, mainly because of few participants, short follow-up ...
