Supplementary Data — Chlorhexidine reduces COVID-19 risk: real-time meta analysis of 5 studies

@CovidAnalysis, December 2025, Version 5V5
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2+ Bonn (DB RCT) 85% 0.15 [0.01-2.74] viral load 6 (n) 9 (n) Short term viral CT​1​ Improvement, RR [CI] Treatment Control Jing (DB RCT) 79% 0.21 [0.11-0.39] OGD 10/120 56/140 OGD CT​1​ Jing (DB RCT) 97% 0.03 [0.00-0.57] severe case 0/120 15/140 CT​1​ Jing (DB RCT) 95% 0.05 [0.00-0.78] severe case 0/120 11/140 CT​1​ Jing (DB RCT) 83% 0.17 [0.02-1.34] severe case 1/120 7/140 CT​1​ Sulistyani 54% 0.46 [0.29-0.73] viral load 15 (n) 15 (n) Huang (RCT) 75% 0.25 [0.19-0.34] viral+ 38/159 127/135 Huang (RCT) 85% 0.15 [0.09-0.25] viral+ 13/93 75/80 Huang (RCT) 60% 0.40 [0.29-0.55] viral+ 25/66 52/55 Karami (DB RCT) 61% 0.39 [0.16-0.97] symptoms 36 (n) 40 (n) Karami (DB RCT) 82% 0.18 [0.03-1.20] symptoms 36 (n) 40 (n) Karami (DB RCT) 56% 0.44 [0.15-1.27] symptoms 36 (n) 40 (n) Karami (DB RCT) 11% 0.89 [0.29-2.70] symptoms 36 (n) 40 (n) Karami (DB RCT) 95% 0.05 [0.00-0.97] symptoms 36 (n) 40 (n) Karami (DB RCT) 57% 0.43 [0.20-0.91] cases 7/36 18/40 Chlorhexidine COVID-19 outcomes c19early.org December 2025 ​1​ CT: study uses combined treatment Favors chlorhexidine Favors control
Fig. S1. All outcomes.
Loading..
Fig. S2. Comparison of results for RCTs versus observational studies. For COVID-19 treatments, there is no significant difference between the results of RCTs and observational studies. Observational studies do not systematically over or underestimate efficacy. For high-cost treatments, there is a non-significant trend towards RCTs showing greater efficacy.