Literature DB >> 8601116

The number needed to treat: a clinically useful nomogram in its proper context.

G Chatellier1, E Zapletal, D Lemaitre, J Menard, P Degoulet.   

Abstract

The number needed to treat is a meaningful way of expressing the benefit of an active treatment over a control. It can be used either for summarising the results of a therapeutic trial or for medical decision making about an individual patient, but its use at the bedside has been impeded by the need for time consuming calculations. A nomogram has therefore been devised that will greatly simplify the calculations. Since calculations are now easy, the number needed to treat can be used to access the value of several interventions, although it does have its limitations. In particular it should not be used when it is not known whether the relative risk reduction associated with an intervention is constant for all levels of risk, or for periods of time longer than that studied in the original trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8601116      PMCID: PMC2350093          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.312.7028.426

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


  12 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  A population-based study of the risk of recurrence of birth defects.

Authors:  R T Lie; A J Wilcox; R Skjaerven
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-07-07       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Cardiovascular disease risk profiles.

Authors:  K M Anderson; P M Odell; P W Wilson; W B Kannel
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.749

5.  Beta-blockers after myocardial infarction: influence of first-year clinical course on long-term effectiveness.

Authors:  C M Viscoli; R I Horwitz; B H Singer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1993-01-15       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Do physicians estimate reliably the cardiovascular risk of hypertensive patients?.

Authors:  G Chatellier; A Blinowska; J Menard; P Degoulet
Journal:  Medinfo       Date:  1995

7.  Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration.

Authors:  S Yusuf; D Zucker; P Peduzzi; L D Fisher; T Takaro; J W Kennedy; K Davis; T Killip; E Passamani; R Norris
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-08-27       Impact factor: 79.321

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

Authors:  H C Bucher; M Weinbacher; K Gyr
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-09-24

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

Review 10.  Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, Short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context.

Authors:  R Collins; R Peto; S MacMahon; P Hebert; N H Fiebach; K A Eberlein; J Godwin; N Qizilbash; J O Taylor; C H Hennekens
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-04-07       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  39 in total

1.  Bayesian communication: a clinically significant paradigm for electronic publication.

Authors:  H P Lehmann; S N Goodman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat.

Authors:  Alexandra Barratt; Peter C Wyer; Rose Hatala; Thomas McGinn; Antonio L Dans; Sheri Keitz; Virginia Moyer; Gordon Guyatt For
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-08-17       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Prophylactic Ankle Taping and Bracing: A Numbers-Needed-to-Treat and Cost-Benefit Analysis.

Authors:  Lauren C. Olmsted; Luzita I. Vela; Craig R. Denegar; Jay Hertel
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Number needed to treat (or harm).

Authors:  Martin R Tramèr; Bernhard Walder
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  A systematic review of prophylactic braces in the prevention of knee ligament injuries in collegiate football players.

Authors:  Brian G Pietrosimone; Terry L Grindstaff; Shelley W Linens; Elizabeth Uczekaj; Jay Hertel
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.860

6.  Understanding and expressing "Risk".

Authors:  Mahmoud Elbarbary
Journal:  J Saudi Heart Assoc       Date:  2010-05-11

7.  Nomogram for number needed to treat will be of limited use.

Authors:  J Thomas; C Sharp
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-11

8.  Adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer. Concerns about chemotherapy are legitimate.

Authors:  R Gray; J Northover
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-06-01

9.  Information in practice.

Authors:  A Tonks; R Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-08-24

10.  Intensive cardiovascular risk factor intervention in a rural practice: a glimmer of hope?

Authors:  A Roberts; P Roberts
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.386

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.