MyCovidpaper

coviki.org : The really good ideas and the bibliographic record on Covid-19 viral disease.

Ossip Groth, Lepser Strasse 54, D 39261 Zerbst

Abstract coviki.org collects citations of the peer-reviewed literature on covid-19 disease and additional sources to keep the record of our knowledge, to facilitate fast-access knowledge on a given concept and to highlight unanticipated data on any related topic. coviki.org serves the individual clinician, the individual scientist but it is basically intended to give public health leaders hints on policy-changing developments and ideas. coviki.org is intended to give a platform to the unproven hypotheses years before experimental validation and commercial exploitation. Database URL: http://www.coviki.org

Introduction

COVID-19 disease is the bubonic plague of the current epoche with no established treatment, no working vaccination and an exaggerated public health response which stresses any kind of human social structure beyond its limits. COVID-19 has a facinating pathobiology being the most dispersed manifestation of a polytopic endothelial activation culminating into netosis-facilitated microthromboses up-to macroscopic embolic events, vasculitis look-alikes in any organ system visited, a special renal tissue reaction of whole or partial functional occlusion of the glomerular microvessels called collapsing FSGS. There is a basic immunological hyperactivation which often turns into a state of vast hypercytokinemia or into a so called multiinflammatory disease/ hemphagocytic lymphohistiocytosis systemic disease. Current treatment concepts rank around supportive measures up-to ECMO and artificial heart, appliciation of convential drugs with assumed pathophysiological match and retargeted, save drugs with some in-vitro signals to support their use. New pharmacophores are screened and basic medicinal chemistry is expected to generate drugs which need traditional time-consuming development steps. Emerging concepts like synergistic viruses like parvovirus b19, calming down cellular hyperactivation at the trpm7 target (the nephrologists neglected cation), get complemented by recognising ancient neanderthals genome snippetts or the growing acceptance of vitamin-d3 and all the others or the concept of multikinase inhibition.

Dealing with COVID-19 has sociopsychiatric implications, it gets anybody into isolation causing social COVID with medicinal neglect, social neglect, suicide, unemployment, economic catastrophe and, ultimately, famine and aggressive population movement.

As of 09/30/2020 there are 60k papers in pubmed, 12k in prebulication archives, another load in PMCentral and unknown in the 'open access literature' which is partially covered by PubMed. We can slice the load into some folders:

- Virus biology, Immunology and Host interaction - further Pathobiology - Drug development and other therapeutic concepts

- Current clinical MGMT (Respiration, Proning) with some guidelines on the horizon - Imaging and Laboratory assessment

- Disease reactions caused within COVID19 disease - Diseases influencing COVID19 disease - Handling clinical subject areas or specific diseases under COVID19 restrictive terms, hospital and general preventive measures

- Ecology, Epidemiology and Public Health measures - The growing field of Humanities, politics and secondary economic implications - Social conduct disorders up-to Psychiatry

Methods All technical measures applied have been developed or adapted by me for other related or nonspecific purposes. PubMed and PMCentral were accessed by my moremed.org searchhouse (which uses ncbi's eutils and prints stable offline results with barcod39 marks). [1] Selected items were put into the format used to publish my MedVIP literature collections. [2] From there, every entry opened a common linkout box from which the paper could be accessed by multiple ways, and reformatted metadata in some useful formats for copy/pasting into other applications, concretely, from which a wikimedia template was copied and put into an ancient wikimedia 1.18.6 series wikipedia cms into its final location, first into a mirror page of the topic map, second step into specified 'articles', third step subsorting within the 'article'. In the course of this project, efficiency-enhancing measures were applied.

The way the user goes is to enter the e.g. 'heart' section to learn about cardiac manifestations. Currently, there is no searchable database by whole content, for which there is no need since PubMed and PubMed Central can be searched with moremed.org.

Whether a searchable db should be set up with contents from other sources like doaj or medrxiv, symposium abstracts or book chapters is a secondary question in case a scaleup would be efficient. A dedicated db space inside the same system is easy to implement. I made a predecessor project 'Metatextbook of Medicine' which aligned about 100k free review articles to about 14k concepts with systematic automatization by tagging and latter complete transformation of the dataset. [3] Resources used were Visual Studio, PHP, MySQL. All code and experience used here has its roots in that project. Little 'new' code had to be developed.

Practically, a batch of PubMed or PMC is accessed, printed-out and most articles get tagged into one of 10 useful major categories. About some 4k items database numbers are copied into a .odt table by barcode readers, from there into a converter, then into another one and ultimately, 100 items blocks of wikitext are copied to the end of some major topics to which they are content-related avaiting subindexing from there.

Maintaining the collection is time-consuming and it would not be manageable by a physician in full-time clinical work.

Secondary evidence synthesis is possible by using the highly substructured topical collections, topics which cannot be filled with 'toclilizumab AND covid' search terms, especially in the humanities sections the user can be lead to appropriate outspoken ideas.

Results An index organized in the way a book's table of contents looks like has been structured by local concept similarity. Each entry opens the 'article' which per intention contains the citations, with regular and highlighted ones, with possible substructuring smaller topics and possible subindexing of bigger topics (i.e. candidate compounds -> hydroxychloroquine ). At first draft, 2500 items are indexed into 60 main topics ordered into 11 concept fields. The estimated selected output from PubMed and PMCentral is 8000 items per 8th May 2020, and 3 months later we stand at babylonic 40k to keep up.

Discussion coviki.org has been born by another reason than to restructure and present the valid scientific record as a pure algorithmic database. There is no dropbox where a late-breaking idea could be put - and from where it would go into the mind & concepts of those who are doing the work and even those who are controlling the work.

No public health official would look into maladjusted social media to learn about a new idea, nobody would put it into twitter of facebook setting himself at risk of being penalized and deprived from a resource he needs in addition to his publication list while trying to climb up his academic carreer. (Fb: 'we cancle all hcq reports which are not backed-up by WHO').

I had my personal idea, put it into a webpage, emailed it to Trump, Boris Johnson while on respirator, German, Swiss and Austrian health ministries, RKI, WHO and the result was nothing. I set a petition to the german Bundestag to operate an expert panel to check the valid ideas scratched from the crowd - it will be discussed with many more fater summertime vacation, bulk, thank you.

The bibliographic database is the accepted backbone of coviki.org. Valid ideas from any source could be added at the risk of pushing quack. Even the latter could be an enabler of thinking - if not useful, try to explain why.

So, coviki.org is the host of the ideas, pre-experimental, proven and failed. It is easily accessable, it is stable, and anything included is at least an accepted thought on a major problem of mankind.

In this war against comtemporary civilization it is of utmost importance that anybody thinks out of his realms of quite unrelated experience and proposes questions he by himself could never be able to answer. (I need 1m patients observed 10 years to prove my personal bet with two on file, me and my mother).

Anything we (speaking as 1-of-mankind) will do can only be based on assumptions and high-speed rejections of single items i.e. a pharmacophore with unforeseen toxicity, getting patients resilient to infection and drugs, getting patients less-infective, getting filters electrostatic without nanotoxicity, its developing options and strategies and products without the ability to prove any in years-long trials.

A bin to keep up with the successes and failures, a dashboard of ideas, is that one piece I try to give mankind with this resource.

References The Introduction is common-sense and needs not to be based. Additional references in the Collection.

1. Groth, Ossip. (2013) Biomedical Searchhouse Mormed.org http://www.moremed.org

2. Groth, Ossip (2013) PMCentral collections http://house-of-papers.com/hop/index.php?title=MedVIP

3. Groth, Ossip. (2012) Literaturrecherche: Metatextbook of Medicine, Dtsch Arztebl 109(7): A-330