13/n It's also worth noting that Ioannidis has violated his own inclusion criteria, with at least one study under the arbitrary 500-person sample size that has been includedpic.twitter.com/ard0rwK6T4
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
24/n This is actually a serious flaw with the paper - the author has chosen only to pursue corrections of the data that push the IFR lower. If we were to account for excess mortality attributable to COVID-19 - based on published research - the IFRs would all jump substantially
25/n Now, there are some excellent improvements to the paper For example, much of the language in the discussion/conclusion has been correctedpic.twitter.com/KkVboq3eDO
26/n There are still odd, emotive phrases ("blind lockdown"), but the paper no longer describes COVID-19 as common and mild, which was clearly incorrect
27/n However, overall this paper still suffers from many of the issues I previously raised, and seems to still substantially underestimate the IFR of COVID-19
28/n I should be clear that I am not speculating in any way about the reasoning behind these decisions. The fact that the paper underestimates IFR is a problem, but we can't really know why these decisions were made
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.