Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings provide a valuable, noninvasive method for measuring human brain activity. This protocol modi es our general protocol for EEG recording (Farrens et al., 2019) for use during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was created with the help of numerous experts, and it speci es a clear set of steps for interacting with research participants, using personal protective equipment (PPE), and disinfecting equipment, all with the goal of reducing the COVID-19 risks for both laboratory personnel and participants. It focuses on the use of EEG in relatively simple research studies of adults who can easily understand and follow instructions, yet can be readily adapted for studies using other types of EEG experiments or other participant populations.

Objective The purpose of this article was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for detecting coronavirus disease 2019 . Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI were searched up to March 12, 2020. We included studies providing information regarding diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 detection. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled. Results Sixteen studies (n = 3186 patients) were included. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate in general. Pooled sensitivity was 92% (95% CI = 86-96%), and two studies reported specificity (25% [95% CI = 22-30%] and 33% [95% CI = 23-44%], respectively). There was substantial heterogeneity according to Cochran's Q test (p < 0.01) and Higgins I 2 heterogeneity index (96% for sensitivity). After dividing the studies into two groups based on the study site, we found that the sensitivity of chest CT was great in Wuhan (the most affected city by the epidemic) and the sensitivity values were very close to each other (97%, 96%, and 99%, respectively). In the regions other than Wuhan, the sensitivity varied from 61 to 98%. Conclusion Chest CT offers the great sensitivity for detecting COVID-19, especially in a region with severe epidemic situation. However, the specificity is low. In the context of emergency disease control, chest CT provides a fast, convenient, and effective method to early recognize suspicious cases and might contribute to confine epidemic. Key Points• Chest CT has a high sensitivity for detecting COVID-19, especially in a region with severe epidemic, which is helpful to early recognize suspicious cases and might contribute to confine epidemic.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to perform a systematic review and meta- analysis regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for detecting Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and CNKI were searched up to March 12, 2020. We included studies providing information regarding diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 detection. The methodologic quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled.RESULTS: Ten studies (n = 2657 patients) were included. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate in general. Pooled sensitivity was 93% (95% CI: 85 - 97%), and only one study reported specificity (25%, 95% CI:22-30%). There was substantial heterogeneity according to the Cochran Q test (p < 0.01) and Higgins I2 heterogeneity index (96% for sensitivity). After dividing the studies into two groups based on the study site, we found that the sensitivity of chest CT was great in Wuhan (the most affected city by the epidemic) and the sensitivity values were very close to each other (97%, 96% and 99%, respectively). In the regions other than Wuhan, the sensitivity varied from 69% to 98%.CONCLUSION: Chest CT offers the great sensitivity for detecting COVID-19, especially in region with severe epidemic situation. However, the specificity is low. In the context of emergency disease control, chest CT provide a fast, convenient and effective method to early recognize suspicious cases and might contribute to confine epidemic.

NCIP= 2019 coronavirus infected pneumonia 2019-nCoV = 2019 novel coronavirus SARS-CoV = severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus MERS-CoV= Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus WHO = World Health Organization () ARDS = Acute respiratory distress syndrome ABSTRACT Background: A novel pneumonia associated with the 2019 coronavirus infected pneumonia (NCIP) suddenly broke out in Wuhan, China in December 2019. 37287 confirmed cases and 813 death case in China (Until 8th/Feb/2019) have been reported in just fortnight. Although this risky pneumonia with high infection rates and high mortality rates need to be resolved immediately, major gaps in our knowledge of clinical characters of it were still not be established. The aim of this study is to summaries and analysis the clinical characteristics of 2019-nCoV pneumonia. Methods: Literatures have been systematically performed a search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, GreyNet International, and The Cochrane Library from inception up to February 8,2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess quality, and publication bias was analyzed by Egger's test. In the single-arm meta-analysis, A fix-effects model was used to obtain a pooled incidence rate. We conducted subgroup analysis according to geographic region and research scale. Results:A total of nine studies including 356 patients were included in this study, the mean age was 52.4 years and 221 (62.1%) were male. The pooled incidences rate of symptoms as follows: pharyngalgia (12.2%, 95% CI: 0.087-0.167), diarrhea (9.2%, 95% CI: 0.062-0.133) and headache (8.9%, 95% CI: 0.063-0.125). Meanwhile, 5.7% (95% CI: 0.027-0.114) of patients were found without any symptoms although they were diagnosed by RT-PCR. In the terms of CT imaging examination, the most of patients showed bilateral mottling or ground-glass opacity, 8.6% (95% CI: 0.048-0.148) of patients with crazy-paving pattern, and . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.14.20021535 doi: medRxiv preprint 11.5% (95% CI: 0.064-0.197) of patients without obvious CT imaging presentations. The pooled incidence of mortality was 8.9% (95% CI: 0.062-0.126).Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first evidence-based medicine research to further elaborate the clinical characteristics of NCIP, which is beneficial to the next step of prevention and treatment.

The aim of the study was to explore the expression of three genes, HSPD1, SCUBE3, and CXCL14, in osteosarcoma cells and tissue, as well as their association with the prognosis of patients with osteosarcoma. The expression of HSPD1, SCUBE3, and CXCL14 in osteosarcoma cells was detected by using Western blotting method. siRNA was used to knockdown the expression of the three genes. CCK8 cell proliferation assay was used to observe the effect of siRNA interference on U2OS cell proliferation. The expression of the three genes in osteosarcoma tissue was detected employing immunohistochemical method. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare the relations between the expression of the three genes and prognosis. The Western blotting results showed that the expression of Hsp70, SCUBE3 protein, and CXCL14 chemotactic factor in osteosarcoma cells was significantly higher than that in normal osteocytes (p < 0.05). After the three genes were interfered by siRNA, the mRNA and protein expression levels of these genes in osteosarcoma cells were significantly decreased (p < 0.05). The growth rate of U2OS cell after the siRNA interference was significantly lower than that before interference and that in the control group transfected with negative control siRNA (p < 0.05). The result of immunohistochemistry demonstrated that the expression of Hsp70, SCUBE3 protein, and CXCL14 chemotactic factor in osteosarcoma tissues was significantly higher than that in adjacent muscle tissue (p < 0.05). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that the survival rate of the patients with high expression of those three kinds of genes was obviously lower than that of other patients (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the survival rates of patients with high or low expression of two genes (p > 0.05). The expression of HSPD1, SCUBE3, and CXCL14 was all high in osteosarcoma tissues and cells; moreover, the three kinds of genes had close correlations with the prognosis of the patients. Targeted inhibition of these three genes could inhibit the proliferation of the tumor, which may become a new therapeutic target.