Search

Introduction Large language model (LLM)-linked chatbots are being increasingly applied in healthcare due to their impressive functionality and public availability. Studies have assessed the ability of LLM-linked chatbots to provide accurate clinical advice. However, the methods applied in these Chatbot Assessment Studies are inconsistent due to the lack of reporting standards available, which obscures the interpretation of their study findings. This protocol outlines the development of the Chatbot Assessment Reporting Tool (CHART) reporting guideline.Methods and analysis The development of the CHART reporting guideline will consist of three phases, led by the Steering Committee. During phase one, the team will identify relevant reporting guidelines with artificial intelligence extensions that are published or in development by searching preprint servers, protocol databases, and the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of health research Network. During phase two, we will conduct a scoping review to identify studies that have addressed the performance of LLM-linked chatbots in summarising evidence and providing clinical advice. The Steering Committee will identify methodology used in previous Chatbot Assessment Studies. Finally, the study team will use checklist items from prior reporting guidelines and findings from the scoping review to develop a draft reporting checklist. We will then perform a Delphi consensus and host two synchronous consensus meetings with an international, multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to refine reporting checklist items and develop a flow diagram.Ethics and dissemination We will publish the final CHART reporting guideline in peer-reviewed journals and will present findings at peer-reviewed meetings. Ethical approval was submitted to the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board and deemed “not required” in accordance with the Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS2) for the development of the CHART reporting guideline (#17025).Registration This study protocol is preregistered with Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/59E2Q.

IntroductionBecause adult-onset leukoencephalopathy with axonal spheroids and pigmented glia (ALSP) is a rare, rapidly progressive, debilitating, and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is critical. This analysis examined the frequency of initial misdiagnosis of ALSP via comprehensive review of peer-reviewed published cases.MethodsData were extracted from a MEDLINE search via PubMed (January 1, 1980, through March 22, 2022) from eligible published case reports/series for patients with an ALSP diagnosis that had been confirmed by testing for the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor gene (CSF1R) mutation. Patient demographics, clinical symptoms, brain imaging, and initial diagnosis data were summarized descriptively. Categorical data for patient demographics, symptoms, and brain imaging were stratified by initial diagnosis category to test for differences in initial diagnosis based on each variable.ResultsData were extracted from a cohort of 291 patients with ALSP from 93 published case reports and case series. Mean (standard deviation) age of symptom onset was 43.2 (11.6) years. A family history of ALSP was observed in 59.1% of patients. Cognitive impairment (47.1%) and behavioral and psychiatric abnormalities (26.8%) were the most frequently reported initial symptoms. Of 291 total cases, an accurate initial diagnosis of ALSP was made in 72 cases (24.7%) and the most frequent initial misdiagnosis categories were frontotemporal dementia (28 [9.6%]) and multiple sclerosis (21 [7.2%]). Of the 219 cases (75.3%) that were initially mis- or undiagnosed, 206 cases (94.1%) were later confirmed as ALSP by immunohistology, imaging, and/or genetic testing; for the remaining 13 cases, no final diagnosis was reported. Initial diagnosis category varied based on age, family history, geographic region, mode of inheritance, and presenting symptoms of pyramidal or extrapyramidal motor dysfunction, behavioral and psychiatric abnormalities, cognitive impairment, and speech difficulty. Brain imaging abnormalities were common, and initial diagnosis category was significantly associated with white matter hyperintensities, white matter calcifications, and ventricular enlargement.DiscussionIn this literature analysis, ALSP was frequently misdiagnosed. Improving awareness of this condition and distinguishing it from other conditions with overlapping presenting symptoms is important for timely management of a rapidly progressive disease such as ALSP.

BackgroundEarly identification of a patient with infection who may develop sepsis is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, this remains elusive because no single clinical measure or test can reflect complex pathophysiological changes in patients with sepsis. However, multiple clinical and laboratory parameters indicate impending sepsis and organ dysfunction. Screening tools using these parameters can help identify the condition, such as SIRS, quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), or Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). We aim to externally validate qSOFA, SIRS, and NEWS/NEWS2/MEWS for in-hospital mortality among adult patients with suspected infection who presenting to the emergency department.Methods and analysisPASSEM study is an international prospective external validation cohort study. For 9 months, each participating center will recruit consecutive adult patients who visited the emergency departments with suspected infection and are planned for hospitalization. We will collect patients' demographics, vital signs measured in the triage, initial white blood cell count, and variables required to calculate Charlson Comorbidities Index; and follow patients for 90 days since their inclusion in the study. The primary outcome will be 30-days in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome will be intensive care unit (ICU) admission, prolonged stay in the ICU (i.e., ≥72 hours), and 30- as well as 90-days all-cause mortality. The study started in December 2021 and planned to enroll 2851 patients to reach 200 in-hospital death. The sample size is adaptive and will be adjusted based on prespecified consecutive interim analyses.DiscussionPASSEM study will be the first international multicenter prospective cohort study that designated to externally validate qSOFA score, SIRS criteria, and EWSs for in-hospital mortality among adult patients with suspected infection presenting to the ED in the Middle East region.Study registrationThe study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05172479).

Background: Screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in patients with hematological malignancy is recommended because of their increased risk of tuberculosis (TB). We assessed the utility of tuberculin skin test (TST) screening in patients with acute leukemia and subsequent outcomes of LTBI treatment. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients ≥16 years of age with acute leukemia from 2013–2014 with a TST planted and read prior to the initiation of antineoplastic chemotherapy treatment. Demographics, clinical information and treatment outcomes of LTBI therapy were compared between patients with positive TST (≥10 mm induration) and negative TST. Results: A total of 389 patients with acute leukemia were included in the cohort. Of them, 37/389 (9.5%) had a positive TST. Only 3.4% (8/235) of individuals originating from North and South America as well as the Caribbean were TST positive, while 21% (20/95) of individuals from Asia were TST positive. Diagnostic imaging findings consistent with prior tuberculosis infection were higher in TST positive patients compared to TST negative ones (29.7% versus 9.4%, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, 31/38 patients (81.6%) who were TST positive received LTBI therapy, which was well tolerated. There was no significant difference in overall survival among those who received LTBI therapy compared to those who did not. No patients developed active TB. Conclusions: Universal screening with TST may be of low yield in individuals with acute leukemia unless patients originate from a TB endemic country. When therapy for LTBI is prescribed, patients with acute leukemia do not experience drug-induced liver toxicity and are likely to complete the intended duration of therapy, thus preventing the development of active tuberculosis.

Abstract To determine the effectiveness and safety of amino acids in preventing the mortality and morbidity among preterm infants. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, and grey literature, from databases inception to January 2021. We included randomized trials that evaluated any amino acids on preterm or low-birth weight infants. We performed frequentist pairwise and network meta-analyses and used the GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence and provide a summary of the results.We included 18 trials (3702 infants). Low certainty evidence showed that there seems to be no benefit for arginine, glutamine, or N-acetylcysteine in reducing all-cause mortality. Oral arginine likely results in reduction of necrotizin enterocolitis (NEC) stage ≥ II (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.26–0.90; moderate certainty). Oral glutamine may reduce the likelihood of developing late-onset sepsis (LOS) compared to placebo (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.47–0.82; low certainty); and likely reduces time to reach full enteral feeding (MD = − 2.63 days; 95% CI − 4.99 to − 0.27; moderate certainty). Amino acids may have no effect on mortality. Oral arginine may reduce severe NEC, and oral glutamine may reduce LOS and the time to reach full feeding. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD4201603873.

Aim: To evaluate the prognosis of 30-day survival post-cardiac arrest among patients receiving home care and nursing home residents. Methods: We conducted a population-level retrospective cohort study of community-dwelling adults (≥18 years) who received cardiac arrest care at a hospital in Ontario, Canada, between 2006 to 2018. We linked population-based health datasets using the Home Care Dataset to identify patients receiving home care and the Continuing Care Reporting System to identify nursing home residents. We included both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrests. We determined unadjusted and adjusted associations using logistic regression after adjusting for age and sex. We converted relative measures to absolute risks. Results: Our cohort contained 86,836 individuals. Most arrests (55.5 %) occurred out-of-hospital, with 9,316 patients enrolled in home care and 2,394 residing in a nursing home. When compared to those receiving no support services, the likelihood of survival to 30-days was lower for those receiving home care (RD = −6.5; 95 %CI = −7.5 – −5.0), with similar results found within sub-groups of out-of-hospital (RD = −6.7; 95 %CI = −7.6 – −5.7) and in-hospital arrests (RD = −8.7; 95 %CI = −10.6 – −7.3). The likelihood of 30-day survival was lower for nursing home residents (RD = −7.2; 95 %CI = −9.3 - −5.3) with similar results found within sub-groups of out-of-hospital (RD = −8.6; 95 %CI = −10.6 – −5.7) and in-hospital arrests (RD = −5.0; 95 %CI = −7.8 – −2.1). Conclusion: Patients receiving home care and nursing home residents had worse overall prognoses of survival post-cardiac arrest compared to those receiving no pre-arrest support, highlighting two medically-complex groups likely to benefit from advance care planning.

Summary: Background: The non-causal and causal associations, possible age and sex differences between living alone and all-cause mortality among adults were unclear. We aimed to assess the association and causal relation between living alone and all-cause mortality among community-dwelling adults, addressing the certainty of evidence, possible age and sex differences. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and APA PsycINFO for cohort studies examining the association between living alone and all-cause mortality on November 19, 2021. We used the GRADE approach to assess certainty of evidence, and the Instrument for the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) to evaluate credibility of subgroup inferences and conducted a meta-analysis of measures of association between living alone and mortality. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021290895. Findings: 18 cohort studies with 62,174 adults proved eligible. Living alone was associated with mortality (relative risk (RR) = 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08–1.23). Both age and sex modified the association (high and moderate credibility, separately). Living alone increased the risk of dying only in younger but not older individuals (ratio of RRs = 1.59, interaction P = 0.003; younger RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17–1.71, high certainty for prognosis, low for causation; older RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.91–1.22, moderate certainty for prognosis, very low for causation). Living alone increased risk to a greater extent in males than females (ratio of RRs = 1.39, 95% CI 1.14–1.70; interaction P = 0.001, males RR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.17–1.71, high certainty for prognosis, low for causation; females RR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.99–1.33; moderate for prognosis factor, very low for causation). Interpretation: Living alone is associated with increased mortality in individuals under 65 years (high certainty) but not with those over 75 years; the association may be causal (low certainty). Associations, and possibly effects, may be stronger in men than women. Funding: None.

Abstract Background Early identification of patients at risk for postoperative delirium is essential because adequate well-timed interventions could reduce the occurrence of delirium and the related detrimental outcomes. Methods We will conduct a systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of prognostic studies evaluating the predictive value of risk factors associated with an increased risk of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective surgery. We will identify eligible studies through systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from their inception to May 2020. Eligible studies will enroll older adults (≥ 50 years) undergoing elective surgery and assess pre-operative prognostic risk factors for delirium and incidence of delirium measured by a trained individual using a validated delirium assessment tool. Pairs of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, screen titles and abstracts of identified citations, review the full texts of potentially eligible studies. We will contact chief investigators of eligible studies requesting to share the IPD to a secured repository. We will use one-stage approach for IPD meta-analysis and will assess certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Discussion Since we are using existing anonymized data, ethical approval is not required for this study. Our results can be used to guide clinical decisions about the most efficient way to prevent postoperative delirium in elderly patients. Systematic review registration CRD42020171366 .

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a common reason for admission to the cardiac intensive care unit. We sought to identify the role of an HF consultation service in improving the management of this patient population. Methods: We identified all adult patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (2014-2015) at the University Health Network with a diagnosis of acute decompensated HF ± cardiogenic shock (CS). Clinical characteristics and course were recorded. We calculated a propensity score–adjusted association between HF consultation and in-hospital mortality. Results: A total of 285 unique patients were identified in our cohort. Of these, 82 (28.7%) died. A total of 150 patients (52.6%) were co-managed by an HF service, and 135 patients (47.3%) were not. Patients who were managed by an HF team were younger (52.5 vs 68.0 years, P < 0.0001), were more likely to be admitted with CS (61.3 vs 41.5%, P < 0.0009), and had higher rates of vasoactive medications during their admission (69.3% vs 52.6%, P < 0.005). At discharge, there were higher rates of discharge to a HF clinic (52.0% vs 27.5%, P < 0.0001) and prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy. In-hospital mortality was lower in those co-managed by a HF team (16.7% vs 42.2%, P < 0.0001). HF consultation reduced the odds of readmission by 76% (odds ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.47). Conclusions: Patients managed by a HF team were more likely to be in CS at admission, to survive to discharge from hospital, and to be initiated on guideline-directed medical therapy with HF follow-up. Résumé: Contexte: L’insuffisance cardiaque (IC) est un motif fréquent d’admission à l’unité de soins intensifs de cardiologie. Cette étude visait à cerner le rôle d’un service de consultation spécialisé en IC dans l’amélioration de la prise en charge de la population de patients atteinte de cette affection. Méthodologie: Un recensement de tous les patients adultes admis en 2014-2015 à l’unité de soins intensifs de cardiologie du Réseau universitaire de santé et ayant reçu un diagnostic d’IC aiguë décompensée avec ou sans choc cardiogénique a été effectué. Les caractéristiques cliniques et l’évolution de l’atteinte avaient été consignées pour ces patients. L’association, ajustée en fonction du score de propension, entre la consultation pour IC et la mortalité hospitalière a été calculée. Résultats: Au total, 285 patients uniques ont été recensés dans la cohorte. De ce nombre, 82 (28,7 %) patients sont décédés. Sur les 285 patients, 150 (52,6 %) avaient été pris en charge conjointement par un service spécialisé en IC, tandis que les 135 (47,3 %) autres ne l’avaient pas été. Les patients pris en charge par une équipe spécialisée en IC étaient plus jeunes (52,5 vs 68,0 ans, p < 0,0001), étaient plus susceptibles d’être en proie à un choc cardiogénique à l’admission (61,3 vs 41,5 %, p < 0,0009) et étaient plus nombreux à avoir reçu un agent vasoactif à l’admission (69,3 % vs 52,6 %, p < 0,005). Ils ont aussi été plus nombreux à être orientés vers une clinique spécialisée en IC à leur sortie de l’hôpital (52,0 % vs 27,5 %, p < 0,0001) et à se voir prescrire un traitement médical recommandé dans des lignes directrices. La mortalité hospitalière était plus faible chez les patients qui ont fait l’objet d’une prise en charge conjointe par une équipe spécialisée en IC (16,7 % vs 42,2 %, p < 0,0001). La consultation d’une équipe spécialisée en IC a en outre réduit le risque de réadmission de 76 % (rapport de cotes de 0,24; intervalle de confiance à 95 % : 0,13-0,47). Conclusions: Les patients pris en charge par une équipe spécialisée en IC étaient plus susceptibles d’être en proie à un choc cardiogénique à l’admission, de survivre à leur sortie de l’hôpital, de se voir prescrire un traitement médical recommandé dans des lignes directrices et de faire l’objet d’un suivi dans une clinique spécialisée en IC.

Summary: Alcohol use is a major risk factor for death and disease worldwide and alcohol-related harms appear to be more prevalent in rural and remote, relative to urban, communities. This Review synthesised international research on rural–urban disparities in hazardous and harmful alcohol use and risk factors for these outcomes within rural and remote communities. 280 studies from 49 countries were included in the Scoping Review. Most studies (60%) found rural, relative to urban, residence to be associated with an increased likelihood of hazardous alcohol use or alcohol-related harm. This proportion increased between 1990 and 2019 and varied by country, age group, and outcome type, being highest in Australia, among young adults, and for more severe alcohol-related harms, such as drink driving and alcohol-related suicide. Improved public health strategies to reduce the burden of alcohol use in rural communities are required but their efficacy will depend on how well they are tailored to the unique needs of the region they are implemented in.

Background and objective The prognostic value of age and other non-hematological factors in predicting outcomes in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) undergoing antileukemic therapy is not well understood. We performed a systematic review to determine the association between these factors and mortality and health-related quality of life or fatigue among these patients. Methods We searched Medline and Embase through October 2021 for studies in which researchers quantified the relationship between age, comorbidities, frailty, performance status, or functional status; and mortality and health-related quality of life or fatigue in older patients with AML receiving antileukemic therapy. We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool, conducted random-effects meta-analyses, and assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results We included 90 studies. Meta-analysis showed that age (per 5-year increase, HR 1.16 95% CI 1.11–1.21, high-quality evidence), comorbidities (Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-specific Comorbidity Index: 3+ VS less than 3, HR 1.60 95% CI 1.31–1.95, high-quality evidence), and performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/ World Health Organization (ECOG/WHO): 2+ VS less than 2, HR 1.63 95% CI 1.43–1.86, high-quality evidence; ECOG/WHO: 3+ VS less than 3, HR 2.00 95% CI 1.52–2.63, moderate-quality evidence) were associated with long-term mortality. These studies provided inconsistent and non-informative results on short-term mortality (within 90 days) and quality of life. Conclusion High-quality or moderate-quality evidence support that age, comorbidities, performance status predicts the long-term prognosis of older patients with AML undergoing antileukemic treatment.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241955.].

BackgroundThe number of solid organ transplants in Canada has increased 33% over the past decade. Hospital readmissions are common within the first year after transplant and are linked to increased morbidity and mortality. Nearly half of these admissions to the hospital appear to be preventable. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies hold promise to reduce admission to the hospital and improve patient outcomes, as they allow real-time monitoring and timely clinical intervention. ObjectiveThis study aims to determine whether an innovative mHealth intervention can reduce hospital readmission and unscheduled visits to the emergency department or transplant clinic. Our second objective is to assess the use of clinical and continuous ambulatory physiologic data to develop machine learning algorithms to predict the risk of infection, organ rejection, and early mortality in adult heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients. MethodsRemote Mobile Outpatient Monitoring in Transplant (Reboot) 2.0 is a two-phased single-center study to be conducted at the University Health Network in Toronto, Canada. Phase one will consist of a 1-year concealed randomized controlled trial of 400 adult heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients. Participants will be randomized to receive either personalized communication using an mHealth app in addition to standard of care phone communication (intervention group) or standard of care communication only (control group). In phase two, the prior collected data set will be used to develop machine learning algorithms to identify early markers of rejection, infection, and graft dysfunction posttransplantation. The primary outcome will be a composite of any unscheduled hospital admission, visits to the emergency department or transplant clinic, following discharge from the index admission. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported outcomes using validated self-administered questionnaires, 1-year graft survival rate, 1-year patient survival rate, and the number of standard of care phone voice messages. ResultsAt the time of this paper’s completion, no results are available. ConclusionsBuilding from previous work, this project will aim to leverage an innovative mHealth app to improve outcomes and reduce hospital readmission in adult solid organ transplant recipients. Additionally, the development of machine learning algorithms to better predict adverse health outcomes will allow for personalized medicine to tailor clinician-patient interactions and mitigate the health care burden of a growing patient population. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04721288; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04721288 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)PRR1-10.2196/26816

Background. The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted health systems worldwide, including solid organ donation and transplantation programs. Guidance on how best to screen patients who are potential organ donors to minimize the risks of COVID-19 as well as how best to manage immunosuppression and reduce the risk of COVID-19 and manage infection in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr) is needed. Methods. Iterative literature searches were conducted, the last being January 2021, by a team of 3 information specialists. Stakeholders representing key groups undertook the systematic reviews and generation of recommendations using a rapid response approach that respected the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations frameworks. Results. The systematic reviews addressed multiple questions of interest. In this guidance document, we make 4 strong recommendations, 7 weak recommendations, 3 good practice statements, and 3 statements of “no recommendation.” Conclusions. SOTr and patients on the waitlist are populations of interest in the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, there is a paucity of high-quality evidence to guide decisions around deceased donation assessments and the management of SOTr and waitlist patients. Inclusion of these populations in clinical trials of therapeutic interventions, including vaccine candidates, is essential to guide best practices.

Abstract Background Upon surviving the first year post-lung transplantation, recipients can expect a median survival of 8 years. Within the first year, graft failure and multi-organ failure (possibly secondary to graft failure) are common causes of mortality. To better understand the prognosis within the first year, we plan on conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies addressing the association between the patient, donor, and transplant operative factors and graft loss 1-year post-lung transplant. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register, and PubMed supplemental for non-MEDLINE records for observational studies identifying independent risk factors for early mortality (1 year) in adult lung transplant recipients. We plan on including cohort studies and secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials studying adult lung transplant recipients undergoing their first lung transplant, without any simultaneous organ transplant. We will conduct a random-effects meta-analysis that pools the effect estimates from all eligible studies to obtain a summary estimate and confidence interval for all independent non-therapeutic factors identified in the primary studies. Discussion The results from this study may inform future guidelines on the selection of candidates and donors for transplantation and predictive model development and inform the decision-making process that the physician and patient undertake together. Furthermore, through the conduction of this review, we can identify the limitations with the current best evidence, which will encourage the need for studies with a better methodology to reassess the predictors of mortality.

Background and purposeThe objective of our systematic review is to identify prognostic factors that may be used in decision-making related to the care of patients infected with COVID-19.Data sourcesWe conducted highly sensitive searches in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Embase. The searches covered the period from the inception date of each database until April 28, 2020. No study design, publication status or language restriction were applied.Study selection and data extractionWe included studies that assessed patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infectious disease and examined one or more prognostic factors for mortality or disease severity. Reviewers working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We performed meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each prognostic factor and outcome.ResultsWe included 207 studies and found high or moderate certainty that the following 49 variables provide valuable prognostic information on mortality and/or severe disease in patients with COVID-19 infectious disease: Demographic factors (age, male sex, smoking), patient history factors (comorbidities, cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, cardiac arrhythmia, arterial hypertension, diabetes, dementia, cancer and dyslipidemia), physical examination factors (respiratory failure, low blood pressure, hypoxemia, tachycardia, dyspnea, anorexia, tachypnea, haemoptysis, abdominal pain, fatigue, fever and myalgia or arthralgia), laboratory factors (high blood procalcitonin, myocardial injury markers, high blood White Blood Cell count (WBC), high blood lactate, low blood platelet count, plasma creatinine increase, high blood D-dimer, high blood lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), high blood C-reactive protein (CRP), decrease in lymphocyte count, high blood aspartate aminotransferase (AST), decrease in blood albumin, high blood interleukin-6 (IL-6), high blood neutrophil count, high blood B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), high blood urea nitrogen (BUN), high blood creatine kinase (CK), high blood bilirubin and high erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)), radiological factors (consolidative infiltrate and pleural effusion) and high SOFA score (sequential organ failure assessment score).ConclusionIdentified prognostic factors can help clinicians and policy makers in tailoring management strategies for patients with COVID-19 infectious disease while researchers can utilise our findings to develop multivariable prognostic models that could eventually facilitate decision-making and improve patient important outcomes.Systematic review registrationProspero registration number: CRD42020178802. Protocol available at: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20056598v1.