10/n On top of that, the serology isn't great. Serology often misses people who are tested early in their infection, so the estimates of infection rates for all the groups are probably too low
-
-
21/n The explanation in the text also doesn't quite make sense. The paper reports excluding people who had a positive serological test at baseline - how can these people have been tested if there were no serological tests when the study started?pic.twitter.com/I561MZ8JsA
Show this thread -
22/n So what does this all mean? Well, overall, it's quite hard to trust the trial's results
Show this thread -
23/n The study does not appear to follow the guidelines for implementation and analysis for cluster RCTs, which means that it's hard to know what to make of the analysishttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5881078/ …
Show this thread -
24/n The primary outcome was also switched, with a bunch of other odd inconsistencies in the research that make it a bit hard to know if the conclusions hold water
Show this thread -
25/n To their credit, the authors talk about some of these things in the limitations section of the study, but not all of them and I'm not sure they really explain why these are not issuespic.twitter.com/KaUEJBj2ki
Show this thread -
26/n Anyway, I'm not sure I would rely on this study as evidence for much, despite the large size
Show this thread -
27/n Apologies, one of the above tweets is wrong. The authors did indeed take into account the clustering in their statistical analysishttps://twitter.com/jt_kerwin/status/1386920483916947464?s=20 …
Show this thread -
28/n The more I read this paper, the weirder it sounds. So they randomized ineligible people (how?) from two floors that were not clustered, and then assigned them to vitamin C if the other medications were contraindicated?https://twitter.com/salonium/status/1386922872317247489?s=20 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
