ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
Effects of hydroxychloroquine and favipiravir on clinical course in outpatients with COVID-19
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Due to the importance of early outpatient treatment to prevent hospitalization and disease progression, we examined the effects of hydroxychloroquine and favipiravir, which were initiated in early period, on the clinical course of COVID-19 outpatients. Materials and methods: Data of confirmed COVID-19 outpatients over a 4-month period were analyzed retrospectively. Public Health Management System (HSYS) was used for the case-based follow-up. Patients on antiviral therapy for at least five days, including hydroxychloroquine and / or favipiravir and patients who were followed-up for 30 days were included in this analysis. Results: We enrolled 1489 patients in this study. Overall, 775 (52%) patients were male and a mean age of patients was 38.9 ± 11.1 years. Of these patients, 537 of them were received favipiravir, 545 of them were received hydroxychloroquine and 407 of them were received both favipiravir and hydroxychloroquine. Symptoms improvement on the 14th day of follow-up was 1.8 times higher in the group of patients receiving hydroxychloroquine compared to patients who received favipiravir (p = 0.003). On the 3rd day of follow- up, PCR negativity rate was higher in patients who received hydroxychloroquine (p = 0.004). Hospitalization rates were similar in patients receiving favipiravir and hydroxychloroquine (p = 0.144). However, in the presence of pneumonia at the time of diagnosis, the hospitalization rate was 6.6 times higher in patients who received favipiravir than those who received hydroxychloroquine. Conclusion: The subgroups of patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and/or favipiravir did not have similar disease severities in our study. Therefore, further studies with homogeneous patient groups to be arranged prospectively are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.