|Study||Studied vs control treatments||Type||Study endpoint||Relative effect (95%CI)||x1/n1 x0/n0||Study risk of bias||Indirectness||Remarks||Tags|
|BCN PEP-CoV-2-Study 2 (Mitja et al. Clin Infect Dis), 2020 NCT04304053||hydroxychloroquine vs standard of care||RCT||hospitalization||0.75 [0.32;1.77]||-/137 -/157||some concern
|PATCH Cohort 1 (Amaravadi), 2021 NCT04329923||hydroxychloroquine vs standard of care||RCT||hospitalization||1.79 [0.06;57.93] C||1/15 0/13||some concern
0.79 [0.34; 1.81]
I2 = 0 %
|-/152 -/170||some concern||no overall indirectness||k=2 studies; N=322 patients overall|
|x1: number of event in experimental group (studied treatment); n1: sample size of experimental group;
x0: number of event in control group (control treatment); n0: sample size of control group;
Study risk of bias assessed for the study primary endpoint(s) or the main endpoints in case of no formally defined primary endpoint(s);
Conclusive (statistically conclusive): statistically significant with a strict control of overall risk of type 1 error (statistically demonstrated), does not take into account the risk of bias;
1: Mitja et al. Clin Infect Dis; 2: Amaravadi;
Bayesian (posterior) relative TE 95% CI: 0.79 [0.34; 1.81]
posterior probability of favorable treatment effect (PTE): 71.3 %
some concern risk of bias. This probability should be interpreted according to the risk of bias.
Funnel plot not drawn. Less than 3 points!
Asymetry test p-value = NaN (by Egger's regression)
Funnel plot not drawn. Less than 3 points.
treatments: 657, outcome: 448, pathologies: 97, subgroup: 0, T0: 649,650,589,651