Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem:
http://conacyt.repositorioinstitucional.mx/jspui/handle/1000/7580| High-cited favorable studies for COVID-19 treatments ineffective in large trials | |
| John Ioannidis | |
| Acceso Abierto | |
| Atribución-NoComercial | |
| https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269097 | |
| https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269097v1 | |
| Importance. COVID-19 has resulted in massive production, publication and wide dissemination of clinical studies trying to identify effective treatments. However, several widely touted treatments failed to show effectiveness in large well-done randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Objective. To evaluate for COVID-19 treatments that showed no benefits in subsequent large RCTs how many of their most-cited clinical studies had declared favorable results for these interventions. Methods. Scopus (last update December 23, 2021) identified articles on lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxycholoroquine/azithromycin, remdesivir, convalescent plasma, colchicine or interferon (index interventions) that represented clinical trials and that had received >150 citations. Their conclusions were assessed and correlated with study design features. The ten most recent citations for the most-cited article on each index intervention were examined on whether they were critical to the highly-cited study. Altmetric scores were also obtained. Findings. 40 articles of clinical studies on these index interventions had received >150 citations (7 exceeded 1,000 citations). 20/40 (50%) had favorable conclusions and 4 were equivocal. Highly-cited articles with favorable conclusions were rarely RCTs while those without favorable conclusions were mostly RCTs (3/20 vs 15/20, p=0.0003). Only 1 RCT with favorable conclusions had sample size >160. Citation counts correlated strongly with Altmetric scores, in particular news items. Only 9 (15%) of 60 recent citations to the most highly-cited studies with favorable or equivocal conclusions were critical to the highly-cited study. Conclusion. Many clinical studies with favorable conclusions for largely ineffective COVID-19 treatments are uncritically heavily cited and disseminated. Early observational studies and small randomized trials may cause spurious claims of effectiveness that get perpetuated. | |
| medRxiv and bioRxiv | |
| 14-01-2022 | |
| Preimpreso | |
| www.medrxiv.org | |
| Inglés | |
| Epidemia COVID-19 | |
| Público en general | |
| VIRUS RESPIRATORIOS | |
| Versión publicada | |
| publishedVersion - Versión publicada | |
| Aparece en las colecciones: | Artículos científicos |
Cargar archivos:
| Fichero | Tamaño | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
| High cited favorable studies for COVID 19 treatments ineffective in large trials.pdf | 418.67 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizar/Abrir |