- Douglas G Altman, professor of statistics in medicine (d.altman@icrf.icnet.uk)a,
- Per Kragh Andersen, professor of biostatisticsb
- a Imperial Cancer Research Group Medical Statistics Group, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Institute of Health Sciences, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF
- b Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
- Correspondence to: Correspondence to: D G Altman
- Accepted 5 July 1999
The number of patients who need to be treated to prevent one additional event (number needed to treat; NNT) has become a widely used measure of treatment benefit derived from the results of randomised controlled trials with a binary outcome 1 2 We show how to obtain a number needed to treat for studies where the primary outcome is the time to an event. We consider primarily the situation where there is no access to raw data, for example, when reviewing a published study, and also how to proceed when given the raw data.
Summary points
The number needed to treat is the number of patients who need to be treated to prevent one additional adverse outcome
This number (with confidence interval) is a clinically useful way to report the results of controlled trials
For any trial which has reported a binary outcome, the number needed to treat can be obtained as the reciprocal of the absolute difference in proportions of patients with the outcome of interest
In studies where the outcome of interest is the time to an event, calculations can be extended to show the number needed to treat at any time after the start of treatment
Time to event data
As noted previously, for studies with binary outcome the number needed to treat will vary according to the length of follow up.3 For studies of survival this relation with time is more explicit. There is no single number needed to treat; rather it can be calculated at any time point after the start of treatment. Often there are one or two time points of particular clinical interest.
A time specific number needed to treat represents the number of patients who need to be given the treatment in question for one additional patient to survive to that time point—that is, to benefit from …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The word parameter is almost always wrong.
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Television shows and education about sexually transmitted infections: no laughing matter
Published 25 May 2012
Re: David Morrell
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Time to end the distinction between mental and neurological illnesses
Published 25 May 2012
Re: Are we nearly there with tranexamic acid?
Published 25 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (8 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27