Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
It is extraordinary to observe the efforts of the scientific community in seeking treatments against SARS-CoV-2 over the past year.
We have witnessed the development of trials to evaluate the efficacy of both older antimalarial drugs and brand novel monoclonal antibodies, often with conflicting results.
We have observed remarkable attempts to identify optimal dosing of anticoagulant drugs to counteract the SARS-CoV-2 thrombophilic trigger, still with unsatisfactory findings.
We have noted several attempts to resolve doubts regarding the best technique and timing of non-invasive ventilation, yet unclear.
We have read curious home-management protocols, rich in antibiotics and steroids, but without proofs of benefit.
We have been spectators of never-ending television debates on the efficacy and economic impact of lockdown and protective masks, with supporters on both sides often lacking scientific evidence.
We have long heard arguments about the best type of nasopharyngeal swab, without ever pointing out the limitations of any diagnostic test, in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
Only recently the first guideline of the European Respiratory Society has come to our rescue, collecting, with an enormous effort, the …
Contributors CB and FV conceived of the presented idea. CB, FV and FE wrote the manuscript with support from FA and LF. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final 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.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.