A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19

CITATION: Agarwal, A. et al. 2022. A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19. British Medical Journal, 370. doi:10.1136/bmj.m3379The original publication is available at https://jcp.bmj.com/This living guideline by Arnav Agarwal and colleagues (BMJ 2020;370:m3379, doi:10.1136/bmj.m3379) was last updated on 22 April 2022, but the infographic contained two dosing errors: the dose of ritonavir with renal failure should have read 100 mg, not 50 mg; and the suggested regimen for remdesivir should have been 3 days, not 5-10 days. The infographic has now been corrected.Publishers versio

Blast demand estimation of rc-moment-resisting frames using a proposed multi-modal adaptive pushover analysis procedure

The procedure of estimating the RC moment-resisting frames under blast loading using a multi-mode adaptive pushover (MADP) analysis is investigated in the current study. The main advantage of the proposed procedure is the combination of the multi-mode and adaptive pushover analysis approaches, which has not been done in the past for blast loadings. To investigate the efficiency of the proposed approach, several RC moment-resisting frames (RC-MRFs) of the 4-, 8-, and 20- storey are considered in the study. For a better comparison, the conventional modal pushover analysis (MPA), nonlinear response history analysis (NRHA), and the proposed approach are considered in the simulations. To this end, various influential parameters including the lateral force, floor displacement, storey drift, storey drift ratio, etc. are considered. For all models, the first three mode shapes were considered in the analysis procedure, while for the case of 20 storey RC-MRF, the torsional effect is included as well. The results indicated that the proposed MADP procedure has adequate accuracy and efficiency to estimate the blast loading demand on RC-MRFs

Gender disparities in COVID-19 clinical trial leadership.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the gender distribution of clinical trial leadership in COVID-19 clinical trials. METHODS: We searched https://clinicaltrials.gov/and retrieved all clinical trials on COVID-19 from January 1, 2020 to June 26, 2020. As a comparator group, we have chosen two fields that are not related to emerging infections and infectious diseases: and considered not directly affected by the pandemic: breast cancer and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and included studies within the aforementioned study period as well as those registered in the preceding year (pre-study period: January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019). Gender of the investigator was predicted using the genderize.io API (application programming interface). The repository of the datasets used to collect and analyse the data available at https://osf.io/k2r57/. RESULTS: Only 27.8% (430/1548) of principal investigators (PIs) among COVID-19-related studies were women, which is significantly different compared to 54.9% (156/284) and 42.1% (56/133) for breast cancer (p0.05). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that less than one-third of COVID-19-related clinical trials are led by women PIs, half the proportion observed in non-COVID-19 trials over the same period which remained similar to the pre-study period. These gender disparities during the pandemic may indicate not only a lack of women's leadership in international clinical trials and involvement in new projects but also may reveal imbalances in women's access to research activities and funding during health emergencies