The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all
COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to
join and to participate in
project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build
consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the
project talk page.
For infoboxes on the main articles of countries, use Wuhan, Hubei, China for the origin parameter. (
March 2020)
"Social distancing" is generally preferred over "physical distancing". (
April 2020,
May 2020)
Page title
COVID-19 (full caps) is preferable in the body of all articles, and in the title of all articles/category pages/etc.(
RM April 2020, including the main article itself,
RM March 2021).
SARS-CoV-2 (exact capitalisation and punctuation) is the common name of the virus and should be used for the main article's title, as well as in the body of all articles, and in the title of all other articles/category pages/etc. (
June 2022, overturning
April 2020)
Map
There is no consensus about which color schemes to use, but they should be consistent within articles as much as possible. There is agreement that there should be six levels of shading, plus gray for areas with no instances or no data. (
May 2020)
There is no consensus about whether the legend, the date, and other elements should appear in the map image itself. (
May 2020)
For map legends, ranges should use fixed round numbers (as opposed to updating dynamically). There is no consensus on what base population to use for per capita maps. (
May 2020)
To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.
A note on
WP:MEDRS: Per this
Wikipedia policy, we must rely on the highest quality secondary sources and the recommendations of professional organizations and government bodies when determining the scientific consensus about medical treatments.
Ivermectin: The highest quality sources (
1234) suggest Ivermectin is not an effective treatment for COVID-19. In all likelihood, ivermectin does not reduce
all-cause mortality (moderate certainty) or improve
quality of life (high certainty) when used to treat COVID-19 in the outpatient setting (
4). Recommendations from relevant organizations can be summarized as: Evidence of efficacy for ivermectin is inconclusive. It should not be used outside of clinical trials. (
May 2021,
June 2021,
June 2021,
July 2021,
July 2021) (
WHO,
FDA,
IDSA,
ASHP,
CDC,
NIH)
Chloroquine & hydroxychloroquine: The highest quality sources (
1234) demonstrate that neither is effective for treating COVID-19. These analyses accounted for use both alone and in combination with
azithromycin. Some data suggest their usage may worsen outcomes. Recommendations from relevant organizations can be summarized: Neither hydroxychloroquine nor chloroquine should be used, either alone or in combination with azithromycin, in inpatient or outpatient settings. (
July 2020,
Aug 2020,
Sep 2020,
May 2021) (
WHO,
FDA,
IDSA,
ASHP,
NIH)
Ivmmeta.com, c19ivermectin.com, c19hcq.com, hcqmeta.com, trialsitenews.com, etc: These sites are not reliable. The authors are pseudonymous. The findings have not been subject to peer review. We must rely on expert opinion, which describes these sites as unreliable. From published criticisms (
12345), it is clear that these analyses violate basic methodological norms which are known to
cause spurious or false conclusions. These analyses include studies which have very small sample sizes, widely different dosages of treatment,
open-label designs, different incompatible outcome measures, poor-quality
control groups, and ad-hoc un-published trials which themselves did not undergo peer-review. (
Dec 2020,
Jan 2021,
Feb 2021)
"Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19".
doi:
10.1056/NEJMoa2115869. {{
cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (
help)