2/n The study is here. Altmetric of >2,000, hundreds of news articles about it alreadyhttps://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/fullarticle/2770872 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
3/n The basic idea of the study is simple - we know that COVID-19 can be spread through droplets. Sometimes these droplets might go into eyes. Wearing glasses might prevent this, so do people who wear regular corrective glasses get COVID-19 less than people who don't?
Show this thread -
4/n Now, usually what you'd do here is identify one group of people with glasses, one without, and follow them up through time to see if the infection rates were different This is what's known as a cohort study
Show this thread -
5/n Another way of doing this research would be to look at people who have caught COVID-19, and another group who haven't, and compare them in terms of the proportion who wear glasses This is called a case-control study, and is what these researchers appear to have donepic.twitter.com/yn6yCxsm1Q
Show this thread -
6/n Essentially, the cases (COVID-19 patients) wore glasses less than controls (non-COVID-19 patients), which might indicate that glasses prevented COVID-19 infection So far so good, right?
Show this thread -
7/n Well, there are a few immediate and obvious snags Snag 1: small sample size. We have <300 cases and no information on controls. That's weird, and problematic (usually these studies are much bigger)pic.twitter.com/XlgaAoXkB8
Show this thread -
8/n Snag 2: The outcome measure isn't wearing glasses. The study actually appears to compare short-sightedness percentages between the cases and controls, which is an obviously imperfect measurepic.twitter.com/16EPba7jxB
Show this thread -
9/n (It's imperfect because not everyone who wears glasses is myopic and not everyone who is myopic wears glasses >8hrs per day)
Show this thread -
10/n But then we hit the biggest snag of all The control population You see, the authors didn't actually collect a control sample. The rate of myopia here is from ANOTHER STUDY ENTIRELYpic.twitter.com/YH4f5BlDBK
Show this thread -
11/n Not only that, but the study was conducted IN 1987 and the extrapolation is just weirdly moved forward from then This makes NO SENSE AT ALLpic.twitter.com/2RpQyPbyhY
Show this thread -
12/n I honestly don't know what to say here. They're comparing the rate of myopia in a group of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 to the research findings of physical fitness of students from 1987 You can't draw any meaning from that!
Show this thread -
13/n These two groups are so wildly different that it's entirely impossible to say whether the glasses had the slightest impact on anything at all, it's just very strange speculation
Show this thread -
14/n Maybe glasses DO prevent COVID-19 transmission, but based on this research we have absolutely no idea if that's true
Show this thread -
15/n The ABSOLUTE BEST you can say from this research is that it appears that fewer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from a single hospital in Hubei had myopia than some high-school students in '87 It's not even about glasses!
Show this thread
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.