ArticleBMJ open2023
Clinical use of remdesivir in COVID-19 treatment: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study investigated remdesivir's clinical use to provide direct evidence of effectiveness for a low-middle income Asian setting.
designA one-to-one propensity score matching retrospective cohort study.
settingA tertiary hospital with COVID-19 treatment facilities in Vietnam.
participantsA total of 310 patients in standard of care (SoC) group were matched with 310 patients in SoC+remdesivir (SoC+R) group. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was time to critical progression, defined as all-cause mortality or critical illness. The secondary outcomes were length of oxygen therapy/ventilation and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Outcome reports were presented as HR, OR or effect difference with 95% CI.
resultsPatients receiving remdesivir had a lower risk for mortality or critical illness (HR=0.68, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.96, p=0.030). Remdesivir was not associated with a shorter length of oxygen therapy/ventilation (effect difference -0.17 days, 95% CI -1.29 to 0.96, p=0.774). The need for invasive mechanical ventilation was lower in SoC+R group (OR=0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.86, p=0.007).
conclusionsThis study's results showing remdesivir's benefits in non-critical patients with COVID-19 may be extrapolated to other similar low-middle income countries, allowing more regimens for limited resource areas and reducing poor outcomes and equity gap worldwide.
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.