BMJ 2002;325:1364 ( 7 December )

Letters

CONSORT statement requires closer examination

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR---Several correspondents have criticised the HOPE investigators for focusing on relative effects when the absolute benefit was very small. Twisselmann, in her summary of many responses on the website, comments: "It was noted that only the relative risk reduction was given in the study. This should have been accompanied by data on absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat and even number needed to harm (as per CONSORT guidelines)."1

This sentence may accurately reflect comments on bmj.com, but it misrepresents the CONSORT statement. Although we agree that in many cases it is helpful to present results as both reduction in relative risk and reduction in absolute risk, CONSORT makes no such recommendation.

Badrinath observes that if general agreement is reached then the next CONSORT guidelines should include a statement that, whenever applicable the results of clinical trials should include the numbers needed to treat.1 Clearly, no such . . . [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

Preventing stroke with ramipril
P Badrinath, Andrew P Wakeman, Jacqueline G Wakeman, John S Yudkin, Malvinder S Parmar, and Birte Twisselmann
BMJ 2002 325: 439. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ