You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 82, Issue 2
  • Response to ‘Correspondence on ‘Prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis’’ by Shi et al

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence response
Response to ‘Correspondence on ‘Prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis’’ by Shi et al
  1. Shintaro Akiyama1,
  2. Shadi Hamdeh2,
  3. Dejan Micic1,
  4. Atsushi Sakuraba1
  1. 1 Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
  2. 2 Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Motility, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Atsushi Sakuraba, Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; asakurab{at}medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu

https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-219394

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We thank Shi et al 1 for their interest and comments on our research article ‘Prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis’.2 The following is our point by point reply to their comments.

    First, in terms of case-controlled study, we included studies with data regarding the prevalence or clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases (ADs) and patients without ADs or the general population. We agree that subgroup analysis according to study design can often be useful in identifying heterogeneity.

    Second, we agree that the risk of bias (RoB) assessment is an important step to conduct systematic review and meta-analysis. As Shi et al suggested, several tools are available to assess the RoB of individual studies included …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Josef S Smolen

    • Contributors SA, SH, DM and AS: drafted the manuscript. SA and AS: critically reviewed the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles