Objective: To evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published on Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) and to investigate the reasons behind compromising the quality, if found. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify the Randomized Controlled Trails published on Coronavirus Disease-19 between 1st Dec 2019 to 31st Aug 2021. Research articles met with study criteria were included in the study. Assessment of quality of randomized controlled trials was done using modified Jadad scale. Results: 21,259 records of randomized controlled trials were identified through database searching, out of which 90 randomized controlled trials were included in the study and, 34 (37.8%) were of high-quality, 46 (51.1%) were of moderate quality, and 10 (11.1 %) were of low-quality studies. There were 40 (44.4%), 38 (42.2%), and 12 (13.3%) randomized controlled trials published in the early, middle, and late terms with Jadad score 5.12, 5.34, and 5.68 respectively (P=0.52). When comparing the blinding status, appropriate blinding, and methods to evaluate adverse events in randomized controlled trials with modified Jadad score, a significant difference was observed (P<0.001). A significant moderate positive correlation was found between the impact factor of the journal and the modified Jadad scale score (R2= 0.48, P<0.001). Conclusion: Findings from our study indicate that accelerated publication of Coronavirus Disease-19 researches along with the fast-track review process has resulted in lowering study quality scores. With the emergence of stronger evidence, Coronavirus Disease-19 clinical studies with lower methodological quality should be revisited. Keywords: COVID-19, Randomized Controlled Trials, Jadad scale, Quality Assessment
Can We Really Trust the Findings of the COVID-19 Research? Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published on COVID-19