or not?

We have concocted a dataviz which sheds light on the analysis carried out by a trio of the IHU counting Professor Didier Raoult, on the basis of 21 clinical studies, including the famous Lancet one.

The COVID-19 epidemic has opened up a broad medical, media and sometimes ideological debate on the effectiveness of treatments based on chloroquine derivatives in the management of the infection. The last Lancet publication dated May 22 and affirming the ineffectiveness or even the danger of this type of treatment was quick to make the IHU teams react: Matthieu Million, Yanis Roussel, Didier Raoult therefore published 3 days later a preliminary study which takes up the result and the methods of analysis on the scale of 21 clinical studies – including that of Lancet1 – recently conducted on the whole globe.

Their purpose: To highlight the conditions for carrying out the analyzes and the quality of the data available.

3 major points are highlighted:

  • PRO vs CONS: does the study conclude that chloroquine derivatives are effective?
  • PHYSICIAN vs DATABASE ANALYSIS: Is the clinical study supported by “clinicians” or a raw database analysis?
  • WITH or WITHOUT TREATMENT DETAILS: Are the precise conditions (dosage, contraindications, measures, etc.) and a duration of treatment of at least 48 hours before being able to assess the objective described?

The IHU analysis therefore combines the 21 studies according to these 3 criteria: delivers these results through datavizualisation, which now allows you to understand at a glance the work of the Marseille medical team!

The ultimate Big Data Glossary

2020/05/26 | FOCUS COVID19

1 : The Lancet study is included under the label “International” in the breakdown by country