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?

Nananda F. Col, MD, MPP; Stephen G. Pauker, MD; Mark H. Eckman, MD; John B. Wong, MD
Tufts University School of Medicine Boston, Mass

JAMA. 1997;278(6):476.

	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.

—Dr Rozenberg and colleagues observed that Belgian gynecologists consider risk factors for osteoporosis, but not for CHD, when prescribing HRT. Similarly, recent surveys of US women found that CHD prevention was rarely cited as the reason for initiating HRT¹ and that women with risk factors for CHD were no more likely to receive HRT than those without risk factors.² In our study, we attempted neither to describe nor to explain current prescribing practices, but only to provide a means of quantifying the expected gains and loses from HRT for specific women and perhaps identify those women who could benefit most. Primarily, our model provides women and their physicians with information about the risks of osteoporosis, breast cancer, and cardiovascular disease for the individual and the effect of HRT on these risks.

Dr Weiss questions whether the relative impact of HRT is constant among women with differing levels of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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