Background The COVID-19 pandemic is favoring digital transitions in many industries and in society as a whole. Health care organizations have responded to the first phase of the pandemic by rapidly adopting digital solutions and advanced technology tools. Objective The aim of this review is to describe the digital solutions that have been reported in the early scientific literature to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on individuals and health systems. Methods We conducted a systematic review of early COVID-19–related literature (from January 1 to April 30, 2020) by searching MEDLINE and medRxiv with appropriate terms to find relevant literature on the use of digital technologies in response to the pandemic. We extracted study characteristics such as the paper title, journal, and publication date, and we categorized the retrieved papers by the type of technology and patient needs addressed. We built a scoring rubric by cross-classifying the patient needs with the type of technology. We also extracted information and classified each technology reported by the selected articles according to health care system target, grade of innovation, and scalability to other geographical areas. Results The search identified 269 articles, of which 124 full-text articles were assessed and included in the review after screening. Most of the selected articles addressed the use of digital technologies for diagnosis, surveillance, and prevention. We report that most of these digital solutions and innovative technologies have been proposed for the diagnosis of COVID-19. In particular, within the reviewed articles, we identified numerous suggestions on the use of artificial intelligence (AI)–powered tools for the diagnosis and screening of COVID-19. Digital technologies are also useful for prevention and surveillance measures, such as contact-tracing apps and monitoring of internet searches and social media usage. Fewer scientific contributions address the use of digital technologies for lifestyle empowerment or patient engagement. Conclusions In the field of diagnosis, digital solutions that integrate with traditional methods, such as AI-based diagnostic algorithms based both on imaging and clinical data, appear to be promising. For surveillance, digital apps have already proven their effectiveness; however, problems related to privacy and usability remain. For other patient needs, several solutions have been proposed, such as telemedicine or telehealth tools. These tools have long been available, but this historical moment may actually be favoring their definitive large-scale adoption. It is worth taking advantage of the impetus provided by the crisis; it is also important to keep track of the digital solutions currently being proposed to implement best practices and models of care in future and to adopt at least some of the solutions proposed in the scientific literature, especially in national health systems, which have proved to be particularly resistant to the digital transition in recent years.

Background.Healthcare is responding to the COVID-19 pandemic through the fast adoption of digital solutions and advanced technology tools. The aim of this study is to describe which digital solutions have been reported in the scientific literature and to investigate their potential impact in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. We conducted a literature review searching PubMed and MedrXiv with terms considered adequate to find relevant literature on the use of digital technologies in response to COVID-19. We developed an impact score to evaluate the potential impact on COVID-19 pandemic of all the digital solutions addressed in the selected papers. Results. The search identified 269 articles, of which 145 full-text articles were assessed and 124 included in the review after screening and impact evaluation. Of selected articles, most of them addressed the use of digital technologies for diagnosis, surveillance and prevention. We report that digital solutions and innovative technologies have mainly been proposed for the diagnosis of COVID-19. In particular, within the reviewed articles we identified numerous suggestions on the use of artificial-intelligence-powered tools for the diagnosis and screening of COVID-19. Digital technologies are useful also for prevention and surveillance measures, for example through contact-tracing apps or monitoring of internet searches and social media usage. Discussion. It is worth taking advantage of the push given by the crisis, and mandatory to keep track of the digital solutions proposed today to implement tomorrow's best practices and models of care, and to be ready for any new moments of emergency.

At present, existing evidence about the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and ABO blood group polymorphism is preliminary and controversial. In this meta-analysis we investigate this association and determine SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals' odds of having a specific blood group compared to controls. We performed a systematic search on MED-LINE and LitCovid databases for studies published through July 15, 2020. Seven studies met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, including a total of 13 subgroups of populations (7503 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases and 2962160 controls). We analysed the odds of having each blood group among SARS-CoV-2 positive patients compared with controls. Randomeffects models were used to obtain the overall pooled odds ratio (OR). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed in order to explore the source of heterogeneity and results consistency. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals are more likely to have blood group A (pooled OR 1.23, 95%CI: 1.09-1.40) and less likely to have blood group O (pooled OR = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.67-0.88). Further studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms at the basis of this association, which may affect the kinetics of the pandemic according to the blood group distribution within the population.

At present, existing evidence about the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and ABO blood group polymorphism is preliminary and controversial. In this meta-analysis we investigate this association and determine SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals odds of having a specific blood group compared to controls. We performed a systematic search on MEDLINE and LitCovid databases for studies published through July 12, 2020. 7 studies met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, including a total of 13 subgroups of populations (7524 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases and 2962160 controls). We analysed the odds of having each blood group among SARS-CoV-2 positive patients compared with controls. Random-effects models were used to obtain the overall pooled odds ratio (OR). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed in order to explore the source of heterogeneity and results consistency. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals are more likely to have blood group A (pooled OR 1.21; 95%CI: 1.08-1.37) and less likely to have blood group O (pooled OR 0.76, 95%CI: 0.66-0.87). Further studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms at the basis of this association, which may affect the kinetics of the pandemic according to the blood group distribution within the population.

Frauds and misconduct have been common in the history of science. Recent events connected to the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted how the risks and consequences of this are no longer acceptable. Two papers, addressing the treatment of COVID-19, have been published in two of the most prestigious medical journals; the authors declared to have analysed electronic health records from a private corporation, which apparently collected data of tens of thousands of patients, coming from hundreds of hospitals. Both papers have been retracted a few weeks later. When such events happen, the confidence of the population in scientific research is likely to be weakened. This paper highlights how the current system endangers the reliability of scientific research, and the very foundations of the trust system on which modern healthcare is based. Having shed light on the dangers of a system without appropriate monitoring, the proposed analysis suggests to strengthen the existing journal policies and improve the research process using new technologies supporting control activities by public authorities. Among these solutions, we mention the promising aspects of the blockchain technology which seems a promising solution to avoid the repetition of the mistakes linked to the recent and past history of research.