Given that this was a RETROSPECTIVE study, it seems likely that they could've just...used a different analysis methodology if they thought that multiple comparisons would be an issue? Weird
-
-
As a fun statistical point, the confidence intervals for some of these regression analyses were, uh, pretty wide Older patients had between 35% and 9417% increase risk of death!pic.twitter.com/HMsGPPYXfs
Show this thread -
So what does this all mean? Well, the authors talk about it in their discussion Apparently, the mortality rate was lower than expected, which is "noteworthy"pic.twitter.com/VCSblvjbs5
Show this thread -
Now, I'd argue that this is...problematic It is extremely difficult to compare patients across trials, and absolutely NOT best practice We also saw a high dropout rate in the trial, with 20% of patients not receiving the complete treatment!https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1249547200834580485?s=20 …
Show this thread -
We also have very few patients in this trial, and no control group Also, the patients were selected by their doctors - perhaps picking the patients that they thought had a fighting chance? We can't really say whether the death rate was low or high from the data we have!
Show this thread -
To the author's credit, the final paragraph acknowledges most of this!pic.twitter.com/0TdO2drS1C
Show this thread -
Let's sum up:
very small retrospective trial
no control group
written by pharma funder
high dropout
short timeframe
missing data
poorly written/edited
somewhat odd stats
highly selected patient cohort
no causal conclusions!Show this thread -
Basically, it was a very small study with HUGE caveats that showed an interesting possibility Hard to say anything more than that without a proper trial of some kind
Show this thread -
Some might argue that this should not have been published as a research trial, given the many caveats and huge conflicts of interest this study seems to contain I guess that's a question for
@NEJM, who appear to have garnered millions of reads on the article in the last few daysShow this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You may want to rethink this hypothetical. The far better option is plasma therapy, followed by remdisivir (no clinical data, so it's basically a tossup):pic.twitter.com/uiUxfzNyDi
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.