COVID-19 studies for: C19 studies:  HC QHC Q IvermectinIVM Vitamin DVitamin D ZincZn REGN-COV2REGN LY-CoVLY RemdesivirRMD
HC Q meta analysis
Source   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
8/6
Meta
PEP, Early, Late
Watanabe et al., Open Letter (Letter) (meta analysis - not included in study count)
Concerns regarding the misinterpretation of statistical hypothesis testing in clinical trials for COVID-19
Open letter signed by 38 professors and doctors regarding misinterpretation of statistics in HC Q RCTs.
Authors note [1] that data from RCTs for early treatment in outpatients to date actually show favorable effects, especially in high-risk patients such as the elderly, where efficacy was up to three times higher than in young people. Because most samples were made up of young people without comorbidities, the studies were statistically inconclusive with the entire samples. Authors note that instead of the papers reporting this, they incorrectly claim that the treatment had no effect compared to the placebo. “This misinterpretation in statistical tests is well known and explained in most undergraduate books in the field,” says Watanabe. "An article published in Nature last year states that about 51% of the work on clinical trials with this type of result has incorrect conclusions."
Source   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments.
Submit