BMJ  2006;333:45-46 (1 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7557.45-b

Letter

Care is needed before single test results are combined

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

EDITOR—Tonelli et al have provided valuable data for those interested in the interpretation of multiple test results. I differ, however, on the question of the evaluations of interaction and risk "additivity."1

It seems hard to believe that the interaction between the tests is of only "modest importance" when the odds of death are altered threefold for renal impairment and twofold for proteinuria (by the presence or absence of the other factor.) Admittedly, these are from unadjusted figures, but this is the situation the clinician will face as it is unlikely that all the values for the adjustment factors will be available. If only some are, the full regression equation would not be appropriate. Even with the adjusted figures, the difference in odds of death still amounts to some 16%. It would be helpful to know whether the interaction term for the two tests only is significant or not.


Figure Removed (Available Only in the Full Text)
 . . . [Full text of this article]

 

G H Hall, retired physician

Exeter EX1 2HW h.2@which.net


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

Proteinuria, impaired kidney function, and adverse outcomes in people with coronary disease: analysis of a previously conducted randomised trial
Marcello Tonelli, Powell Jose, Gary Curhan, Frank Sacks, Eugene Braunwald, Marc Pfeffer Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) Trial Investigators
BMJ 2006 332: 1426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ