« Rooting for Results | Main | CANOE and Diabetes as a Surrogate Endpoint »

May 30, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Please correct me if I am wrong.. but what I read is stenting is associated with a 50% decrease in MI rate but a doubling of stroke rate with likely equal mortality. .. Now.. I think I'd choose an MI over stroke if I were to survive. As its likely the MI won't have nearly the devastating impact on my livelihood as a neurologic disaster. Did I get this right?

I agree with the comment from JFS, but that's not how I saw the information presented in the media.

Also, it's worth keeping in mind that a halving of MI rates and a doubling of stroke rates obscures a bit the absolute differences in MI and stroke rates. Mortality was also "doubled" with stenting (0.7 versus 0.3 percent); this was not statistically significant (p=0.18), but is hardly reassuring that stenting is noninferior with regard to mortality. It's hard to imagine choosing stenting over endarterectomy given these results.

you contort to use relative differences. Most patients patients and doctors think better in absolute numbers.

I agree with @JFS; realtive numbers are an abstraction in thinking that will be lost on the layman. Absolute values everytime - mis communication is worse than no communication.

The comments to this entry are closed.