Profile picture
, 10 tweets, 6 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
OK let's do this.
In one place - ALL the randomized trials of #Hydroxychloroquine for #COVID.

5 peer-reviewed RCTs. 1 large RCT still in pre-print, but deserves recognition.

All negative.

I don't know what else to say at this point.

medscape.com/index/list_124…
bmj.com/content/369/bm… ImageImage
nejm.org/doi/full/10.10… ImageImage
acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M2… ImageImage
academic.oup.com/cid/article/do… ImageImage
nejm.org/doi/full/10.10… ImageImage
medrxiv.org/content/10.110… ImageImage
All the above in one easy-to-view slide. Image
For those who want the video version.
Update (8-11-2020):
@boulware_dr pointed out to me that they DID do a subgroup analysis by self-reported zinc usage in the post-exposure prophylaxis trial. No effect. Image
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Keep Current with F. Perry Wilson, MD MSCE

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Related hashtags

#Hydroxychloroquine #COVID

More from @methodsmanmd see all

Profile picture
F. Perry Wilson, MD MSCE
@methodsmanmd
There will be no "antibody passports" for a while. Even if an antibody test has a low (say 5%) false positive rate, if YOU get a positive test, it may only be 50/50 (or less) that you actually have antibodies. WTF? (1/n)
It comes down to the false positive rate versus the positive predictive value. The FPR is how often a test comes back positive in a group of people WITHOUT antibodies. For this example, let's say that's 5%. (2/n)
OK - but as an individual, that number doesn't mean a lot. After all, you don't know if you truly have antibodies or not. That's why you're getting the test. (3/n)
Read 13 tweets
Profile picture
F. Perry Wilson, MD MSCE
@methodsmanmd
We're testing the wrong people for #Covid_19, let me explain (a thread). (1/12)
OK - tests are limited. That's a given. If they were unlimited, we'd test everyone. That's not an option. We need to triage. (2/12)
But what health systems are doing is selecting those who get tested. And they are picking a very specific group to test:
They focus on those with "classic" symptoms - like fever.
(3/12)
Read 12 tweets
Profile picture
F. Perry Wilson, MD MSCE
@methodsmanmd
1/ A student just asked me why, if the p-value for a study is 0.04, we can't say the study has a 4% chance of being a false positive. First off, we definitely can't, even under idealized conditions - here's a brief thread as to why.
2/ (Apologies to the great John Ioannidis who does this better than I ever could), and to @VinayPrasadMD whose "Tweetorials" are an amazing epiphenomenon in and of themselves.
3/ Imagine a world of scientific hypotheses - all those hypotheses out there, floating in the ether. "Atorvastatin reduces nose bleeds" is out there. So is "marijuana use increases the chance of graduating college". Some of these are true hypotheses, some are not.
Read 19 tweets

Embed code for your website

×
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!