Literature DB >> 7950558

Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration.

H C Bucher1, M Weinbacher, K Gyr.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the reporting of study results by using reductions in relative or absolute risk and the number needed to treat affects the views of physicians about the effectiveness of drugs to lower lipid concentrations and decisions about treatment.
DESIGN: Random allocation of two questionnaires presenting the results of three end points of the Helsinki heart study as results from separate trials by using reduction in either relative or absolute risk. In both questionnaires one end point was also presented by showing person years of treatment needed to prevent one myocardial infarction. The effectiveness of lipid lowering drugs was assessed for all end points on an 11 point scale. For each study result the likelihood to treat hypercholesterolaemia of 7.5 mmol/l in a healthy man had to be indicated on a seven point scale.
SUBJECTS: Random sample of 802 internists and general practitioners representative of providers of primary care in Switzerland.
RESULTS: The response rate was 69.6% (558). For the prevention of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction the mean ratings of effectiveness of lipid lowering drugs were 0.45 (95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.69) and 1.39 (1.09 to 1.68) scale points lower when the reduction of absolute risk or number needed to treat were reported instead of the relative risk reduction (both P < 0.001). Physicians receiving trial results for identical end points in form of absolute reduction of risk or number needed to treat were less inclined to treat hypercholesterolaemia (both P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' views of the effectiveness of lipid lowering drugs and the decision to prescribe such drugs is affected by the predominant use of reduction of relative risk in trial reports and advertisements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7950558      PMCID: PMC2541000          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.309.6957.761

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  10 in total

1.  Should there be a moratorium on the use of cholesterol lowering drugs?

Authors:  G Davey Smith; J Pekkanen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-02-15

2.  Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions.

Authors:  L Forrow; W C Taylor; R M Arnold
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.965

3.  An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment.

Authors:  A Laupacis; D L Sackett; R S Roberts
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1988-06-30       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Users' guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. B. What were the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; D L Sackett; D J Cook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-01-05       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  The problem with cholesterol.

Authors:  M G Dunnigan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-05-22

6.  Pharmaceutical prescriptions in four European countries.

Authors:  S Garattini; L Garattini
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-11-13       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Helsinki Heart Study: primary-prevention trial with gemfibrozil in middle-aged men with dyslipidemia. Safety of treatment, changes in risk factors, and incidence of coronary heart disease.

Authors:  M H Frick; O Elo; K Haapa; O P Heinonen; P Heinsalmi; P Helo; J K Huttunen; P Kaitaniemi; P Koskinen; V Manninen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1987-11-12       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Lowering cholesterol concentrations and mortality: a quantitative review of primary prevention trials.

Authors:  M F Muldoon; S B Manuck; K A Matthews
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-08-11

9.  Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness?

Authors:  C D Naylor; E Chen; B Strauss
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1992-12-01       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Cholesterol lowering and mortality: the importance of considering initial level of risk.

Authors:  G D Smith; F Song; T A Sheldon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-05-22
  10 in total
  44 in total

Review 1.  The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians.

Authors:  P McGettigan; K Sly; D O'Connell; S Hill; D Henry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts: improving but not optimal.

Authors:  Eric Dryver; Janet E Hux
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Risk communication in the patient-health professional relationship.

Authors:  S Buetow; J Cantrill; B Sibbald
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  1998-09

4.  Drugs in the news: an analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage of new prescription drugs.

Authors:  Alan Cassels; Merrilee A Hughes; Carol Cole; Barbara Mintzes; Joel Lexchin; James P McCormack
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-04-29       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Preventing stroke with ramipril. Results should have been presented in ways that help practising clinicians.

Authors:  P Badrinath
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-08-24

6.  How to make a silk purse from a sow's ear--a comprehensive review of strategies to optimise data for corrupt managers and incompetent clinicians.

Authors:  David Pitches; Amanda Burls; Anne Fry-Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-12-20

7.  Bridging the gap between therapeutic research results and physician prescribing decisions: knowledge transfer, a prerequisite to knowledge translation.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Boissel; Emmanuel Amsallem; Michel Cucherat; Patrice Nony; Margaret C Haugh
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  Health professionals: how do they assess new medicines?

Authors:  Rebecca Cheng; Kirsty Cook; Sarah Dowman; Rebecca Lawn; Jemma Leary; Taryn Quinn; Kim Schroder; Nicola Smith; June Tordoff
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2005-06

9.  The "number needed to treat" turns 20--and continues to be used and misused.

Authors:  Finlay A McAlister
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  A randomized comparison of patients' understanding of number needed to treat and other common risk reduction formats.

Authors:  Stacey L Sheridan; Michael P Pignone; Carmen L Lewis
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.