Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Andrew J Vickers a Integrative
Medicine Service, Biostatistics Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering
Cancer Center, New York, New York 10021, USA, b ICRF
Medical Statistics Group, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Institute
of Health Sciences, Oxford OX3 7LF Correspondence
to: Dr Vickers vickersa@mskcc.org
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
In many randomised trials researchers measure a continuous variable at baseline and again as an outcome assessed at follow up. Baseline measurements are common in trials of chronic conditions where researchers want to see whether a treatment can reduce pre-existing levels of pain, anxiety, hypertension, and the like.
Statistical comparisons in such trials can be made in several ways.
Comparison of follow up (post-treatment) scores will give a result such
as "at the end of the trial, mean pain scores were 15 mm (95%
confidence interval 10 to 20 mm) lower in the treatment group."
Alternatively a change score can be calculated by subtracting the
follow up score from the baseline score, leading to a statement such as
"pain reductions were 20 mm (16 to 24 mm) greater on treatment than
control." If the average baseline scores are the same in each group
the estimated treatment effect will be the same using these two simple
approaches.
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care