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?

Bruce M. Psaty, MD, PhD; Nicholas L. Smith, MPH; Thomas D. Koepsell, MD, MPH
University of Washington Seattle

Curt D. Furberg, MD, PhD
Bowman Gray School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC

JAMA. 1997;277(22):1759-1760.

	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 Reply.

—In our meta-analysis,¹ we classified trials according to the "primary treatment strategy used in the active group." "While most studies," we stated, "used more than 1 drug in the treated group, the agents were usually applied in a stepped-care approach that was clearly identified." In other words, treatment strategies were defined by the first-line drug, and a variety of other drugs might also be used in the active group. Even the 2 MRC trials described by Dr Michalewicz and colleagues as "β-blocker studies" used supplemental drugs in 11% to 34% of subjects. Indeed, we drew attention to the ambiguous position of the STOP-H study, which "was classified as a β-blocker trial since the first-line agent for 68% in the active group was β-blocker therapy".¹ This approach to classifying trials in terms of primary treatment strategies corresponds to the intention-to-treat principle and simply acknowledges the typical design features of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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