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?

Brian J. Miles; Michael W. Kattan, PhD
Baylor College of Medicine Houston, Tex

R. Brian Giesler, PhD
Houston VA Medical Center Houston, Tex

Mark Cowen, MD
Catherine McAuley Health Center Ann Arbor, Mich

JAMA. 1995;273(15):1173-1174.

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

To the Editor.

—In a decision analysis, a problem is stated, assumptions concerning probabilities and utilities are made, and a conclusion is reached based on the results. If the reader agrees with the structure, assumptions, probabilities, and utilities of the analysis, then he or she must agree with its conclusion. For the clinician, the main challenge to accept any conclusions drawn from a decision analysis is to decide if the analysis mirrors reality. After reviewing the manuscript and supplement published by Dr Krahn and colleagues,¹ we feel their analysis differs enough from reality to prevent us from drawing firm conclusions. Many of their assumptions and the references used to support them are controversial. For instance, we are uncomfortable formulating recommendations for millions of men based essentially on two articles: the study by Johansson et al² of 223 selected Swedish men with cancer, and the 52 cancers detected in . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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