 |
 |

Interpreting the Number Needed to Treat
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
To the Editor: In evaluating studies published in 5 widely circulated journals, Dr Nuovo and colleagues1 found that only 8 of 359 eligible articles reported the number needed to treat (NNT), despite the fact that the reporting of NNT is recommended by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) group.2 Although the authors suggest that NNT allows " . . . comparisons with the amount of effort needed to prevent the same or other events in patients with other disorders," we would like to point out that such comparisons can be misleading.
To illustrate this problem, we reported3 a comparison of the NNT values for 3 interventions: cardiac transplantation, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and cholesterol lowering. The 1-year NNT was 1 for cardiac transplantation, 4 for ICDs, and at least 600 for a treatment that lowered serum cholesterol levels by 10%. On the basis of NNT, one might conclude that . . . [Full Text of this Article]
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Reporting Number Needed to Treat and Absolute Risk Reduction in Randomized Controlled Trials
Jim Nuovo, Joy Melnikow, and Denise Chang
JAMA. 2002;287(21):2813-2814.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
 |
Do socioeconomic characteristics modify the short term association between air pollution and mortality? Evidence from a zonal time series in Hamilton, Canada
Jerrett et al.
J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2004;58:31-40.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Relation between income, air pollution and mortality: a cohort study
Finkelstein et al.
CMAJ 2003;169:397-402.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|