Letters Intensive glycaemic control

Authors’ reply to Yudkin and Lipska

BMJ 2012; 344 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e710 (Published 31 January 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;344:e710
  1. Bianca Hemmingsen, PhD student1,
  2. Søren S Lund, physician2,
  3. Christian Gluud, chief physician and head of department1,
  4. Allan Vaag, professor3,
  5. Thomas Almdal, chief physician and head of department2,
  6. Christina Hemmingsen, research assistant1,
  7. Jørn Wetterslev, chief physician1
  1. 1Copenhagen Trial Unit, Center for Clinical Intervention Research, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  2. 2Steno Diabetes Center, Gentofte, Denmark
  3. 3Department of Endocrinology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital
  1. bh{at}ctu.rh.dk

Yudkin and Lipska note that we did not present the numbers needed to treat for the assessed outcomes in our systematic review.1 2 According to the Cochrane Collaboration, a relative measure—for example, relative risk or odds ratio—is preferred for reporting intervention effects because it remains more stable across different risk groups.3 Therefore, we reported the relative risk ratio for all outcomes.2

Furthermore, we reported the absolute risk difference for the composite microvascular outcome and retinopathy. …

Sign in

Free trial

Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial

Subscribe