BMJ 1996;313:361 (10 August)

Letters

Data may not have been summarised appropriately

EDITOR,--June M C McArdle and colleagues end their paper by saying that "the failure to reduce morbidity in the combined approach [routine care plus support from a breast care nurse and a voluntary organisation] is difficult to explain."1 This logic is not supported by the data presented.

An overconcentration on P values at the expense of descriptive trends seems to have led the authors to conclude that "scores were consistently lower in patients offered support from [a] breast care nurse alone compared with the other groups, which were similar to each other." My interpretation of their data is that the poor showing of the combined approach is explained simply by two opposing effects, one larger than the other. Take, for example, their results for anxiety at 12 months. The means were 4.8 (routine care), 4.4 (routine care plus nurse only), 6.3 (routine care plus voluntary organisation only), and 5.8 (routine . . . [Full text of this article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Psychological support for patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a randomised study
June M C McArdle, W David George, Colin S McArdle, David C Smith, Alastair R Moodie, A V Mark Hughson, and Gordon D Murray
BMJ 1996 312: 813-816. [Abstract] [Full Text]




Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student 

BMJ