COVID-19 studies for: C19 studies:  HC QHC Q IvermectinIVM Vitamin DVitamin D ZincZn REGN-COV2REGN LY-CoVLY RemdesivirRMD
HC Q meta analysis
Source   PDF   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
Early, Late, PrEP, PEP
Covid Analysis (Preprint) (meta analysis - not included in study count)
HC Q is effective for COVID-19 when used early: analysis of 145 studies
HC Q is effective for COVID-19. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 145 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 235 billion (p = 0.0000000000042).
Early treatment is most successful, with 100% of studies reporting a positive effect and an estimated reduction of 63% in the effect measured (death, hospitalization, etc.) using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.37 [0.29-0.47].
100% of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) for early, PrEP, or PEP treatment report positive effects, the probability of this happening for an ineffective treatment is 0.001.
There is evidence of bias towards publishing negative results. 89% of prospective studies report positive effects, and only 74% of retrospective studies do.
Significantly more studies in North America report negative results compared to the rest of the world, p = 0.001.
Source   PDF   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments.