RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 COVID-19 individual participant data meta-analyses. Can there be too many? Results from a rapid systematic review JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2022.09.01.22279485 DO 10.1101/2022.09.01.22279485 A1 Lauren Maxwell A1 Priya Shreedhar A1 Brooke Levis A1 Sayali Arvind Chavan A1 Shaila Akter A1 Mabel Carabali YR 2022 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/09/01/2022.09.01.22279485.abstract AB Background Individual participant data meta-analyses (IPD-MAs), which include harmonising and analysing participant-level data from related studies, provide several advantages over aggregate data meta-analyses, which pool study-level findings. IPD-MAs are especially important for building and evaluating diagnostic and prognostic models, making them an important tool for informing the research and public health responses to COVID-19.Methods We conducted a rapid systematic review of protocols and publications from planned, ongoing, or completed COVID-19-related IPD-MAs to identify areas of overlap and maximise data request and harmonisation efforts. We searched four databases using a combination of text and MeSH terms. Two independent reviewers determined eligibility at the title-abstract and full-text stage. Data were extracted by one reviewer into a pretested data extraction form and subsequently reviewed by a second reviewer. Data were analysed using a narrative synthesis approach. A formal risk of bias assessment was not conducted.Results We identified 31 COVID-19-related IPD-MAs, including five living IPD-MAs and ten IPD-MAs that limited their inference to published data (e.g., case reports). We found overlap in study designs, populations, exposures, and outcomes of interest. For example, 26 IPD-MAs included RCTs; 17 IPD-MAs were limited to hospitalised patients. Sixteen IPD-MAs focused on evaluating medical treatments, including six IPD-MAs for antivirals, four on antibodies, and two that evaluated convalescent plasma.Conclusions Collaboration across related IPD-MAs can leverage limited resources and expertise by expediting the creation of cross-study participant-level data datasets, which can, in turn, fast-track evidence synthesis for the improved diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study is funded by the ReCoDID project, funded by the EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement 825746), and the CIHR Institute of Genetics (grant agreement 01886-000) grant to Lauren Maxwell. The study's funders had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or report writing.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesA spreadsheet with comprehensive information on all planned or concluded IPD-MAs described in this review is available on Zenodo (10.5281/zenodo.6623480) under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6623480