Table Graph
      published meta-analysis   sensitivity analysis   studies

vitamin C in COVID 19 hospitalized - Summary of results

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias death D28detailed resultsZhang, 2020 0.50 [0.17; 1.50] 0.50[0.17; 1.50]Zhang, 202010%56NAnot evaluable deathsdetailed resultsJamali Moghadam Siahkali, 2021 1.00 [0.19; 5.40] Kumari, 2020 0.60 [0.22; 1.64] Zhang, 2020 0.50 [0.17; 1.50] 0.61[0.31; 1.20]Jamali Moghadam Siahkali, 2021, Kumari, 2020, Zhang, 202030%266lownot evaluable deaths (time to event analysis only)detailed resultsZhang, 2020 0.50 [0.17; 1.50] 0.50[0.17; 1.50]Zhang, 202010%56NAnot evaluable clinical deteriorationdetailed resultsZhang, 2020 0.87 [0.23; 3.27] 0.87[0.23; 3.27]Zhang, 202010%56NAnot evaluable mechanical ventilationdetailed resultsJamali Moghadam Siahkali, 2021 1.30 [0.31; 5.40] Kumari, 2020 0.76 [0.33; 1.76] 0.87[0.42; 1.80]Jamali Moghadam Siahkali, 2021, Kumari, 202020%210lownot evaluable0.22.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2024-04-27 16:36 +02:00

TE: relative treatment effect (measured by a risk ratio, an odds ratio or an hazard ratio depending on what is reported in the papers); k: number of studies; n: total number of patients; ROB: risk of bias (ROB 2.0); Pub. bias: publication bias; OBS: observational studies; RCT: randomized clinical trials
studied treatment is better when TE > 1; studied treatment is better when TE < 1;

pathologies: 95,94,90,91 - treatments: 523,885 - roots T: 290

- About us - Contact us - Method - RSS Made with in Lyon - Credits - Privacy policy - Licence Creative Commons