13/n Next, we can look at the analysis itself Or, rather, we can't, because the authors don't describe what they did, only giving relative risks and p-values
-
-
Also, a very simple question that HAS to be answered for the analysis to mean anything: what proportion of people in each country actually got HCQ? Simple question. Without it, the HCQ vs non-HCQ groups mean nothing

- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I read the whole thing. As I said, it's a fundamental flaw, not something you can simply explain away, which is one of many things that make this analysis largely uninterpretable. Updating in the future won't fix this, you'd have to redo everything
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.