Letters
Health promotion in general practice
EDITOR,--We wish to respond to A S Wierzbicki and T M Reynolds's letter1 regarding our study of health promotion in general practice.2 Our objective was to observe the effect of personal health education on the lives of patients with angina; hence this was our obvious criterion for inclusion in the study. It is incorrect that a 50% reduction in the incidence of angina was the criterion chosen to indicate a successful outcome. Rather, in determining our sample size we suggested that effective intervention might reduce the frequency of episodes of angina in those who were categorised as severely affected by about 50%. This criterion was purely arbitrary, but other relevant criteria for determining sample size were unavailable.
The difference in death rate was an incidental finding: further follow up may elucidate the importance of this observation. Our report stated that 38 of the 42 deaths that occurred were attributed to
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
StumbleUpon 
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Article
- BMA's reply
- Mac Armstrong
BMJ 1995 310: 532.[Extract] [Full Text]
This Article
- Full text
- Respond to this article
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when responses are posted
- Alert me when a correction is posted
Services
- Email this article to a friend
- Find similar articles in BMJ
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Related Content
-
Health promotion
-
Diet
-
Health education
-
Smoking
-
Smoking and tobacco
- Relevant Article
- Find this article in its weekly table of contents
Bookmark with
What's new
Latest blogs
Find BMJ on:
Services
Tools
Online poll
Resources
Rapid responses for this article
There are no rapid responses for this article. Print issues
