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?

John K. Baxter III, MD; Gregory J. Beilman, MD; Jerome H. Abrams, MD
University of Minnesota Hospital and Clinic Minneapolis

JAMA. 1997;277(2):108.

	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.

—Although Dr Connors and colleagues¹ claim that right heart catheterization (RHC) results in increased mortality, careful consideration of the data using the evidencebased medicine approach² described in JAMA raises numerous concerns. First, the conclusions are drawn from subgroup analyses. The matched cohorts are subgroups of larger populations that are significantly different in determinants of mortality such as the APACHE III score, blood pressure, renal function, and pulmonary function. The post hoc matching process is therefore at risk for considerable bias and/or confounding. An example of this risk is seen in the use of the propensity score to define the cohorts. An acceptable match for an RHC patient was required to have a propensity score within 0.03 units of the RHC patient. This propensity score limit appears to have been arbitrarily determined. The sensitivity analysis the authors performed failed to consider possible selection bias resulting from . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Margaret A. Winker, MD, Senior Editor, and Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, Senior Editor.

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