An annotated bibliography is basically a list of citations with a brief summary and or analysis for each source. The length of the annotation depends on what your professor is asking for. When in doubt, check with the assignment or the professor, but here are a few concepts that you should keep in mind when writing your annotation:
A tool like the below Lit Review Matrix may help keep track of the different articles as you go along. It may be a little extra work, but could be valuable as you progress on your project.
In terms of formatting, unlike when you're citing using AMA formatting while writing, in an annotated bibliography, citations are listed in alphabetical order. You identify the separate articles by numerically ordering them. When you're ready to add in your annotations, you would add a space below the citation and then add in your summary.
From Annotated Bibliography Assignment 2024
1.Fiorini NB, Garagoli F, Bustamante RC, Pizarro R. Acute pulmonary embolism in a patient with mild COVID-19 symptoms: a case report. Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2021 Jan 21;5(1):ytaa563. doi: 10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa563. PMID: 33521514; PMCID: PMC7819833.
This is a case summary of a 26-year-old female nurse, who had been taking oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) treatment for the last 2 years, developed mild COVID-19 symptoms (rhinitis and anosmia). She underwent isolation at home and was subsequently followed up with telehealth visits. Fifteen days after her initial presentation, she developed acute onset sudden dyspnoea. On physical examination, she was found to be tachycardic with normal pulse oximetry. The initial risk score for VTE was moderate and laboratory results showed increased D-dimer level without other relevant findings. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography was performed, which confirmed low-risk subsegmental pulmonary embolism. The authors discussed that Venous thromboembolism in patients who present with severe COVID-19 symptoms has been described in the literature; its incidence is greater in patients hospitalized in intensive care units and they note that efforts to prevent VTE based on risk scores are widely recognized.
However, they point out a gap in the literature and that is that the relationship in patients who present with mild COVID-19 symptoms and VTE is still unknown. Recently, experts on this field have introduced thromboprophylaxis guidelines including ambulatory patients based on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms and pro-thrombotic risk. The patient in this case report showed no major risk for developing VTE; therefore, the VTE could be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or the eventual pro-thrombotic association with the concomitant use of OCPs.
2.Cohen MA, Edelman A, Paynter R, Henderson JT. Risk of thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19 who are using hormonal contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jan 9;1(1):CD014908. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014908.pub2. PMID: 36622724; PMCID: PMC9829026.
These authors point out that there are no comparative studies assessing risk of thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients who use hormonal contraception, which was the primary objective of their review. They concluded the following. There is very little evidence exists examining the risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity for combined hormonal contraception users compared to non-users of hormonal contraception, and the evidence that does exist is of very low certainty. The odds of hospitalization for COVID-19 positive users of combined hormonal contraceptives may be slightly decreased compared with those of hormonal contraceptive non-users, but the evidence is very uncertain as this is based on one study restricted to patients with BMI under 35 kg/m2. There may be little to no effect of combined hormonal contraception use on odds of intubation or mortality among COVID-19 positive patients, and little to no effect of using any type of hormonal contraception on odds of hospitalization and intubation for COVID-19 patients. At a minimum, they noted no large effect for risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity among hormonal contraception users.
They specifically noted gaps in the literature and pertinent data collection regarding hormonal contraception use such as formulation, hormone doses, and duration or timing of contraceptive use. Differing estrogens may have different thrombogenic potential given differing potency, so it would be important to know if a formulation contained, for example, ethinyl estradiol versus estradiol valerate. Additionally, they downgraded several studies for risk of bias because information on the timing of contraceptive use relative to COVID-19 infection and method adherence were not ascertained. No studies reported indication for hormonal contraceptive use, which is important as individuals who use hormonal management for medical conditions like heavy menstrual bleeding might have different risk profiles compared to individuals using hormones for contraception.
They suggested that future studies should focus on including pertinent confounders like age, obesity, history of prior venous thromboembolism, risk factors for venous thromboembolism, and recent pregnancy.
