MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

A real-time dashboard of clinical trials for COVID-19

zenbrewzenbrew
in Off-Topic
This is the most comprehensive compilation of the Covid-19 research out there that I'm aware of. For me, the interest is in health outcomes/policies/etc., so I placed this in off-topic. But one could look at the research out there for possible investment ideas as well. These links I believe are all open access. This is all courtesy of Lancet Digital Health.

The first link is the article itself outlining the clinical tracker:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30086-8/fulltext?dgcid=raven_jbs_etoc_email#relAudio

This next link is an audio interview with one of the authors, Louis Dron. He explains the way the actual tracker works and its various implications & is definitely well worth listening to:

https://www.thelancet.com/pb-assets/Lancet/stories/audio/landig/2020/TL_Dig_24_April_2020-1587734250317.mp3

The final link is for the actual clinical tracker which is an amazing evolving compilation:

https://www.covid-trials.org/

It can be sorted by geographical area as well as specific treatments. It shows the types of research/studies with links (if available) as well.

Comments

  • MarkMark
    Very nicely done. Thank you.
  • LewisBraham
    While China's population is larger than America's, economically it isn't. It says something about the state of American and Chinese science that China has three times as many clinical trials as we do if I'm reading your last link correctly.
  • sma3
    I will check it out, but for most of my medical career we always thought the Lancet was a second tier journal because they did not require peer review. It was the editor's decision as to what to publish. He probably asked some experts to avoid being embarrassed, but there have been many many studies in the Lancet that were later shown to be wrong.

    I still do peer review for the Annals of Internal Medicine, and it obviously adds at least one to two months to publication. But slower is much better than wrong
  • Old_JoeOld_Joe
    edited April 2020
    "But slower is much better than wrong "

    But... but... but... Trump said that...
Sign In or Register to comment.