You should not rely on the report summary. Researchers seem to have a habit of misreporting their findings.
A summary of their main findings is as follows:
Outcome.....................Ivermectin (N = 250)....................Placebo (N = 251)............Odds Ratio
Hospitalization, N (%),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,14 (5.60).....................21 (8.37).........................0.65
Invasive MVS, N (%)....................4 (1.60).......................3 (1.20)
Dialysis, N (%)...............................1 (0.40)....................1 (0.40)..........................1..00
All-cause mortality, N (%).............4 (1.60).....................3 (1.20)..........................1.34
As you can see there was a 35% reduction in Hospitalisations in the Ivermectin Arm compared to the Placebo.
However, in stead of reporting that they made the mistake in not taking a large enough sample for such a reduction to be declared statistically significant, they incorrectly report that they find no benefit. It has been a common problem with many of the researchers, who rather than report their falling in design of the trial they report as if the treatment been studied showed no benefit.
The numbers for Invasive MVS, Dialsis and All-cause mortality are so small, that they are meaningless.
They should have recommended further studied of what, from their own studied, appears to be beneficial. As the size of the sample is too small, the resukts should be included in future Meta-analysis studies, which combined different studies into one larger analysis.
