published meta-analysis   sensitivity analysis   studies

convalescent plasma treatment in COVID 19 hospitalized - Summary of results

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias deathsdetailed resultsConPlas-19, 2020 0.13 [0.01; 2.54] Gharbharan et al., 2020 0.95 [0.20; 4.59] Li, 2015 0.59 [0.22; 1.59] 0.60[0.27; 1.34]ConPlas-19, 2020, Gharbharan et al., 2020, Li, 201530%268moderatenot evaluable clinical improvementdetailed resultsConPlas-19, 2020 0.94 [0.59; 1.50] Li, 2015 1.40 [0.79; 2.49] 1.11[0.75; 1.62]ConPlas-19, 2020, Li, 2015210%184moderatenot evaluable clinical improvement (28-day)detailed resultsLi, 2015 1.42 [0.65; 3.10] 1.42[0.65; 3.10]Li, 201510%103moderatenot evaluable clinical worseningdetailed resultsConPlas-19, 2020 0.27 [0.06; 1.25] 0.27[0.06; 1.25]ConPlas-19, 202010%81moderatenot evaluable serious adverse eventsdetailed resultsConPlas-19, 2020 0.96 [0.29; 3.17] 0.96[0.29; 3.17]ConPlas-19, 202010%81moderatenot evaluable0.22.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2020-11-25 11:32 +01:00

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: 538 - roots T: 290