@GidMK @K_Sheldrick you know what to do

-
-
Replying to @KramerTheLab @WesElyMD and
I have a few thoughts, the first is that this looks quite legitimate to me. The increases in sample size aren't inappropriate if they were based on a lower than expected event rate on unblinded data. 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @KramerTheLab and
Usually I'm a hard arse on unexamined for secondary outcomes where primary outcomes not significant... but come on it's "all cause mortality" not "oxygen requirements for males 40-59 admitted on a Tuesday" I would be loathe to dismiss that for purist FWER control! 2/
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @KramerTheLab and
The data presented are all reasonable and derivable from the method described. The research described seems plausible for the resources involved and timelines described. 3/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @KramerTheLab and
To be honest, my index of suspicion that there is dodginess here is very low. I can't really see any red flags at all for fraud or research malpractice in the paper. 4/
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @KramerTheLab and
Agreed. Whether the difference in mortality is a real effect or (unlikely) a statistical quirk is perhaps questionable given that disease progression appeared to be pretty similar between groups
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
That being said, the study itself has no red flags I can immediately identify, looks to be a really well-done and transparent piece of research, and the benefit is quite consistent across various secondary analyses. Pretty convincing stuff!
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
Granted, this is in extremely unwell people (~30% risk of death), but it's still quite an encouraging result and the trial itself seems on the level
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
Oh, and one final point - while there are numerous issues with pharmaceutical company funded research, I've yet to see an obviously fraudulent paper funded by pharma. They may do dodgy things with data, but they're MUCH sneakier about it than the ivermectin fakes
3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
Did you see that an ivermectin overdose turned up at a hospital in Sydney?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yes. Extremely concerning
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.