Letter

The PROGRESS trial three years later: Clear and accurate interpretations of studies are needed

BMJ 2004; 329 doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7479.1404 (Published 9 December 2004)
Cite this as: BMJ 2004;329:1404.1

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

  1. Daniel G Hackam (danhackam@cogeco.ca), research fellow
  1. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Canada M4N 3M5

    EDITOR—Like Wennberg and Zimmermann, I am troubled by the interpretation of the results of PROGRESS published in the original Lancet article and reiterated by others; by the amalgamation of the perindopril and perindopril-indapamide arms under the rubric “perindopril based therapy”; and by the chief conclusions about such treatment attributed by the …

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment

    Subscribe

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    Rapid responses

    THIS WEEK'S POLL

    Read related article

    See previous polls

    BMJ most popular