Letters Accuracy of recording acute myocardial infarction events

Authors’ reply to Stevens and McManus

BMJ 2013; 346 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3741 (Published 11 June 2013) Cite this as: BMJ 2013;346:f3741
  1. Anoop Dinesh Shah, clinical research fellow1,
  2. Emily Herrett, research fellow2,
  3. Rachael Boggon, research statistician34,
  4. Spiros Denaxas, senior research associate1,
  5. Liam Smeeth, professor of clinical epidemiology and general practitioner2,
  6. Tjeerd van Staa, professor of pharmacoepidemiology234,
  7. Adam Timmis, professor of clinical cardiology5,
  8. Harry Hemingway, professor of clinical epidemiology1
  1. 1Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Clinical Epidemiology Group, University College London, UK
  2. 2London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  3. 3Clinical Practice Research Datalink Group, Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK
  4. 4Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
  5. 5Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
  1. anoop{at}doctors.org.uk

We thank Stevens and McManus for pointing out that using unlinked primary care databases may underestimate the absolute risk of myocardial infarction because these databases fail to capture all events.1 2 Non-differential under-recording may not cause bias in studies solely focusing on relative effects, …

View Full Text

Log in

Log in through your institution


* For online subscription