Journal
OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages -Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab645
Keywords
COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; ivermectin
Categories
Funding
- Rainwater Charitable Foundation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Ivermectin has become a controversial potential medicine for COVID-19. Early studies suggested its clinical benefits in treating the infection, but the quality of evidence varies and some trials may be fraudulent. A subgroup meta-analysis reveals that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival is mainly observed in poor-quality studies.
Ivermectin has become a controversial potential medicine for coronavirus disease 2019. Some early studies suggested clinical benefits in treatment of infection. However, the body of evidence includes studies of varying quality. Furthermore, some trials have now been identified as potentially fraudulent. We present a subgroup meta-analysis to assess the effects of stratifying by trial quality on the overall results. The stratification is based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias measures and raw data analysis where possible. The results suggest that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival was dependent on largely poor-quality studies. According to the potentially fraudulent study (risk ratio [RR], 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.35), ivermectin improved survival similar to 12 times more in comparison with low-risk studies (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.56-1.66). This highlights the need for rigorous quality assessments, for authors to share patient-level data, and for efforts to avoid publication bias for registered studies. These steps are vital to facilitate accurate conclusions on clinical treatments.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available