- Author:
Heejeong CHOI
1
;
Seunggwan SONG
;
Heesang AHN
;
Hyobean YANG
;
Hyeonseong LIM
;
Yohan PARK
;
Juhyun KIM
;
Hongju YONG
;
Minseok YOON
;
Mi Ah HAN
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health 2024;57(1):47-54
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Objectives:This study was conducted to systematically summarize trends in research concerning patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as reported in Korean medical journals.
Methods:We performed a literature search of KoreaMed from January 2020 to September 2022. We included only primary studies of patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, then performed full-text screening, both independently and in duplicate. We first identified the 5 journals with the greatest numbers of eligible publications, then extracted data pertaining to the general characteristics, study population attributes, and research features of papers published in these journals.
Results:Our analysis encompassed 142 primary studies. Of these, approximately 41.0% reported a funding source, while 3.5% disclosed a conflict of interest. In 2020, 42.9% of studies included fewer than 10 participants; however, by 2022, the proportion of studies with over 200 participants had increased to 40.6%. The most common design was the cohort study (48.6%), followed by case reports/series (35.2%). Only 3 randomized controlled trials were identified. Studies most frequently focused on prognosis (58.5%), followed by therapy/intervention (20.4%). Regarding the type of intervention/exposure, therapeutic clinical interventions comprised 26.1%, while studies of morbidity accounted for 13.4%. As for the outcomes measured, 50.7% of studies assessed symptoms/clinical status/improvement, and 14.1% evaluated mortality.
Conclusions:Employing a systematic approach, we examined the characteristics of research involving patients with COVID-19 that was published in Korean medical journals from 2020 onward. Subsequent research should assess not only publication trends over a longer timeframe but also the quality of evidence provided.