This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

The Lipid Research Clinics Program Investigators

JAMA. 1985;254(2):263-264.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

IN HIS commentary on the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT),^1-3 Richard Kronmal⁴ acknowledges the excellence of its design and conduct and the importance and timeliness of its findings. However, while he does not dispute the basic substantive accuracy of the two published reports of the trial's results,^1,2 he takes issue with the interpretation of these findings. Chiefly, he believes that the statistical significance and generalizability of these findings have been overstated by the investigators.

With regard to the issue of significance, Dr Kronmal does not dispute that a reduction in the combined incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) death and myocardial infarction at least as great as that observed in the LRC-CPPT would have arisen by chance alone in less than one experiment out of 20 (ie, P<.05). However, he criticizes our use of the conventional P equals .05 cutpoint in describing this result . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Lipid Metabolism-Atherogenesis Branch, Division of Heart and Vascular Diseases, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Md.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to the Lipid Metabolism-Atherogenesis Branch, Division of Heart and Vascular Diseases, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Federal 401, Bethesda, MD 20205.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?