2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.jid.2021.04.036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the Risk and Outcome of COVID-19 in Patients with Psoriasis or Psoriatic Arthritis on Biologic Treatment: A Critical Appraisal of the Quality of the Published Evidence

Abstract: The need to rapidly spread information about the risk of COVID-19 in patients with psoriasis (Pso) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) on biologics may have hampered the methodological rigor in published literature. We analysed the quality of papers dealing with the risk and outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with Pso and PsA receiving biologic therapies. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to estimate the quality of the published studies. Moreover, to better contextualize results, specific internal and external… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
11
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…discussed this issue of the so‐called floating numerators, which is the lack of reference to the underlying at risk population. 17 , 18 However international data concerning the prevalence of children under each systemic drug are lacking in hospital setting and private practice, not allowing to compare these proportions. Furthermore, we can also assume that asymptomatic forms of COVID‐19 were less likely to be reported by the investigators.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…discussed this issue of the so‐called floating numerators, which is the lack of reference to the underlying at risk population. 17 , 18 However international data concerning the prevalence of children under each systemic drug are lacking in hospital setting and private practice, not allowing to compare these proportions. Furthermore, we can also assume that asymptomatic forms of COVID‐19 were less likely to be reported by the investigators.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recently published study also raised some concerns about high rate of biases (e.g participation and ascertainment bias) occurring in the studies being published about this topic[29]. This was also noted in a recent systematic literature review performed to inform respective EULAR recommendations[3].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the early days of the pandemic, it was highlighted that well-designed studies were needed to assess whether the risk for adverse COVID-19-related outcomes was increased for SRD patients [ 1 ]. Currently, more than 2 years after the start of the pandemic, several studies assessing the impact of COVID-19 on SRD patients have been published, but only a handful of them are of high-quality and/or powered enough to address these questions [ 2 , 3 ]. Along these lines, the need for more robust data about the vulnerability of SRD patients to COVID-19 and its adverse outcomes is still stressed by experts in the field [ 4 , 5 ].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%