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.
BMJ 2005;331:1474-1475 (17 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7530.1474-c
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORWith reference to Feczko's comments (first letter in this cluster), Hippisley-Cox et al's study was an observational study.1 This occupies a lower place on the hierarchy of evidence than large, prospective randomised controlled trials measuring outcomes that are important to patients (patient oriented evidence that matters, or POEMs).
The only POEM evidence for celecoxib is the CLASS study.2 CLASS showed no significant difference between celecoxib and the comparators (diclofenac and ibuprofen) in terms of the primary outcome of the studygastrointestinal ulcer complications.3 Only when a post-hoc sub-group analysis of these data was performed in those not taking aspirin was a significant benefit seen (with a P value of 0.04). This was one of over 34 post-hoc analyses performed on this study (so, by chance, we would expect at least one of these to show a difference with a P value slightly less than 0.05).4 Others have recently highlighted
Jonathan L Underhill, assistant director, education and development
National Prescribing Centre, The Infirmary, Liverpool L69 3GF jonathan.underhill@npc.nhs.uk