8/n Ok, so that's an issue. What were extremely strong results are now statistically very weak and not beneficial in the major subgroups But there's a bigger issue here
-
-
19/n In other words the conclusion - that moderate-certainty evidence found large reductions in death using ivermectin - is entirely reversed. The certainty is gone, and the reduction in death is likely to be very substantially smaller
Show this thread -
20/n Indeed, since the benefit now appears to rest entirely on one very worrisome trial, it is hard to see how we can justify any argument other than that we do not have sufficient information to make a conclusion about ivermectin at this pointpic.twitter.com/39xLhAewpi
Show this thread -
21/n I remain optimistic that ivermectin will indeed prove to be a "wonder drug" as Elgazzar claimed, but I simply don't think the evidence to date supports that assertion
Show this thread -
22/n With large randomized trials ongoing, we can only wait for them to finish before making a strong judgement as to whether ivermectin is beneficial It may yet turn out to be fantastic. We simply do not know
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thats an absurd analysis. Certainty can come from the aggregate of ALL THE OTHER evidence. Also... Removing a study that doesnt test efficacy of prophylactic use has no effect on our confidence of its prophylactic effectiveness.
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.
