2,500 patients total, they took a subset of the HCQ prescribed people and matched to 190 of the non-HCQ people. Depending on the software/commands, that's what you'd expect to see if they matched exactly as they described
-
-
Also, the categories they matched on were pretty broad, and might include pretty much anything (i.e. "cardiovascular complications") so might just be a case of a ridiculous propensity score that was a waste of time rather than an error
-
That being said, I could probably reproduce that table in my dataset of 100,000 people, with only 2,500 it becomes pretty unlikely imo
End of conversation
New 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.