Search

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first emerged in China in November 2019. Most governments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by imposing a lockdown. Some evidence suggests that a period of isolation might have led to a spike in alcohol misuse, and in the case of patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD), social isolation can favour lapse and relapse. The aim of our position paper is to provide specialists in the alcohol addiction field, in psychopharmacology, gastroenterology and in internal medicine, with appropriate tools to better manage patients with AUD and COVID-19,considering some important topics: (a) the susceptibility of AUD patients to infection; (b) the pharmacological interaction between medications used to treat AUD and to treat COVID-19; (c) the reorganization of the Centre for Alcohol Addiction Treatment for the management of AUD patients in the COVID-19 era (group activities, telemedicine, outpatients treatment, alcohol-related liver disease and liver transplantation, collecting samples); (d) AUD and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Telemedicine/telehealth will undoubtedly be useful/practical tools even though it remains at an elementary level; the contribution of the family and of caregivers in the management of AUD patients will play a significant role; the multidisciplinary intervention involving experts in the treatment of AUD with specialists in the treatment of COVID-19 disease will need implementation. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly leading addiction specialists towards a new governance scenario of AUD, which necessarily needs an in-depth reconsideration, focusing attention on a safe approach in combination with the efficacy of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of COVID‐19 has underlined the need for reliable information to guide clinical practice and policy. This urgency has to be balanced against disruption to journal handling capacity and the continued need to ensure scientific rigour. We examined the reporting quality of highly disseminated COVID‐19 research papers using a bibliometric analysis examining reporting quality and risk of bias (RoB) amongst 250 top scoring Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) COVID‐19 research papers between January and April 2020. Method‐specific RoB tools were used to assess quality. After exclusions, 84 studies from 44 journals were included. Forty‐three (51%) were case series/studies, and only one was an randomized controlled trial. Most authors were from institutions based in China (n = 44, 52%). The median AAS and impact factor was 2015 (interquartile range [IQR] 1,105–4,051.5) and 12.8 (IQR 5–44.2) respectively. Nine studies (11%) utilized a formal reporting framework, 62 (74%) included a funding statement, and 41 (49%) were at high RoB. This review of the most widely disseminated COVID‐19 studies highlights a preponderance of low‐quality case series with few research papers adhering to good standards of reporting. It emphasizes the need for cautious interpretation of research and the increasingly vital responsibility that journals have in ensuring high‐quality publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In December 2019, a new coronavirus has emerged out of China, the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus, causing a disease known as COVID‐19, which steadily has progressed into a pandemic. This coronavirus affects many organs, including the skin, whose manifestations are a consequence of the disease itself, as well as the preventative measures taken to avoid the infection. This paper reviews the cutaneous manifestations which currently have been encountered during this pandemic. Methods: A search was conducted on PubMed, and all relevant articles were included. Results: The results show the occurrence of many cutaneous findings, ranging from those related to the infection itself and to various dermatitides related to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) utilized by healthcare workers while attending to infected patients. Discussion: Recognizing these findings is important for the accurate diagnosis of those infected with COVID‐19 as well as the prompt treatment of the side effects caused by PPE that might further impair the effectiveness of healthcare workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the pattens of international collaboration by analysing publications on COVID‐19 published in the first 6 months of the pandemic. The data set comprised articles on COVID‐19 indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS CC) downloaded four times between 1 April 2020 and 1 June 2020. The analysis of 5,827 documents revealed that 128 countries, 23,127 authors, and 6,349 institutes published on the pandemic. The data reveal that the three main publishing countries were the USA, China, and England with Italy closely following. Although publication was widely spread, most of the institutions with the highest volume of output were in China. Network analysis showed growth in international cooperation with an average degree of country/region cooperation rising to 23.06 by 1 June. There was also a clear core‐periphery structure to international collaboration. Institutional collaboration was shown to be highly regionalized. The data reveal a high and growing incidence of international collaboration on the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Rhodes et al and Liu & Li papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15777 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16048 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Rhodes et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15777 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16058 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]