There is typically no peer review on a research article. The public health consensus is that Hydroxychloroquine is not a treatment or prophylactic for SAR-CoV-2. Why would you reference a retracted publication, from the Lancet no less (the researchers wouldn't provide the source data? who's trying to hide the facts?)?

Here are the NIH guidelines for COVID-19 on the use of Hydroxychloroquine.
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/chloroquine-or-hydroxychloroquine-and-or-azithromycin/

In a large randomized controlled platform trial of hospitalized patients in the United Kingdom (RECOVERY), hydroxychloroquine did not decrease 28-day mortality when compared to the usual standard of care. Patients who were randomized to receive hydroxychloroquine had a longer median hospital stay than those who received the standard of care.

Additionally

Several randomized trials have not shown a clinical benefit for hydroxychloroquine in nonhospitalized patients with early, asymptomatic, or mild COVID-19.16,17 In an open-label trial, Mitja et al. randomized 307 nonhospitalized people who were recently confirmed to have COVID-19 to receive hydroxychloroquine or no antiviral treatment. Patients in the hydroxychloroquine arm received hydroxychloroquine 800 mg on Day 1 followed by 400 mg daily for an additional 6 days. The authors reported no difference in the mean reduction in SARS-CoV-2 RNA at Day 3 or the time to clinical improvement between the two arms

-and- a link to the studies conducted for the use of Hydroxychloroquine
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2b/

I don't know maybe more legit studies to be done...peer-reviewed (which means access to data) - until that happens it really does not look promising for the drug as a treatment option for COVID. And Dr's shopping around their paper is not helping that cause. Do the research, present the data - follow the science.