SynthesisImmunity, inflammation and disease2025
Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of Remdesivir and Molnupiravir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of Remdesivir and Molnupiravir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir (Paxlovid) Versus Remdesivir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Retrospective Studies.Health science reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemdesivir and molnupiravir have been approved and are being used as viable treatment options for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of these two antiviral drugs in the treatment of COVID-19.
methodsAn extensive search was conducted across several databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and medRxiv, up to July 1, 2024. To evaluate the risk of bias, a standardized bias assessment tool was used. Data from the selected studies were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.
resultsThe analysis included data from 10 studies, encompassing a total of 5766 patients. According to the meta-analysis, remdesivir and molnupiravir showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 2.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67, 9.57), hospitalizations (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 0.81, 7.24), viral clearance rates (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.64, 3.46), or average time to viral clearance (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.40, 0.46). However, the incidence of adverse events was lower in the remdesivir group (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.93). The certainty of evidence for these findings was evaluated and determined to be low or moderate.
conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that remdesivir and molnupiravir have similar effectiveness in treating COVID-19 outpatients; however, molnupiravir is associated with a higher rate of adverse events. Additional studies are required to enable a more thorough evaluation of these treatments for COVID-19.
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.