Clara Biagiotti
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Clara Biagiotti has a total of 9 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alessandro Bianconi
Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
1 shared publication - Annalisa Rosso
Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
1 shared publication - Cecilia Acuti Martellucci
Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
1 shared publication - Enrico Zauli
Department of Translational Medicine, University of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
1 shared publication - Gianmarco Imperiali
Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
1 shared publication - Giovanna Letizia Calò
Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via Fossato di Mortara 64, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 19 November 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Healthcare
- Vol. 12 (22) , 2309
Paracetamol Use and COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, paracetamol was widely recommended in different clinical settings, and sometimes advised over non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). These recommendations sparked a strong debate, with reports suggesting either potential benefits or harms for the individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. As no systematic review is available, we performed a meta-analysis to estimate the impact of paracetamol on COVID-19 clinical outcomes compared to a placebo, no use, or NSAIDs. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials or observational studies evaluating any COVID-19 clinical outcome. Data were combined using a generic inverse-variance approach. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Results: One randomized trial and five observational studies, enrolling over 34,000 patients, were included. Overall, as compared to the patients using NSAIDs or receiving no treatment, the individuals who received paracetamol showed no significant differences in the risk of death (summary relative risks 0.93 and 0.91, respectively: both p > 0.05), need to transfer to the intensive care unit, need for respiratory support, or cardiovascular or renal complications. All studies showed a high risk of bias, with a low overall quality of evidence. Conclusions: This meta-analysis found no evidence of harmful or beneficial effects of paracetamol on main COVID-19-related outcomes. Also, the current literature does not provide sufficient data to support a preferential choice between paracetamol and NSAIDs for COVID-19 symptoms management. Further research is needed to confirm the present findings and provide critical insights on the policies to adopt in the case of future pandemics.
- 19 November 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Healthcare
- Vol. 12 (22) , 2309
Open AccessParacetamol Use and COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, paracetamol was widely recommended in different clinical settings, and sometimes advised over non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). These recommendations sparked a strong debate, with reports suggesting either potential benefits or harms for the individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. As no systematic review is available, we performed a meta-analysis to estimate the impact of paracetamol on COVID-19 clinical outcomes compared to a placebo, no use, or NSAIDs. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials or observational studies evaluating any COVID-19 clinical outcome. Data were combined using a generic inverse-variance approach. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Results: One randomized trial and five observational studies, enrolling over 34,000 patients, were included. Overall, as compared to the patients using NSAIDs or receiving no treatment, the individuals who received paracetamol showed no significant differences in the risk of death (summary relative risks 0.93 and 0.91, respectively: both p > 0.05), need to transfer to the intensive care unit, need for respiratory support, or cardiovascular or renal complications. All studies showed a high risk of bias, with a low overall quality of evidence. Conclusions: This meta-analysis found no evidence of harmful or beneficial effects of paracetamol on main COVID-19-related outcomes. Also, the current literature does not provide sufficient data to support a preferential choice between paracetamol and NSAIDs for COVID-19 symptoms management. Further research is needed to confirm the present findings and provide critical insights on the policies to adopt in the case of future pandemics.