Keeping Apples and Oranges Separate: Reassessing Clinical Trials That Use Composite End Points as Their Primary Outcome

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volumn 48, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 850-

  Chan, Paul S ^a   Nallamothu, Brahmajee K ^a   Hayward, Rodney A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; DEATH; HEART FAILURE; HOSPITAL READMISSION; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LETTER; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CLINICAL TRIALS; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HUMANS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33746840576     PISSN: 07351097     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.05.034     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Freemantle N., Calvert M., Wood J., Eastaugh J., and Griffin C. Composite outcomes in randomized trials. greater precision but with greater uncertainty?. JAMA 289 (2003) 2554-2559
2. Lauer M.S., and Topol E.J. Clinical trials-multiple treatments, multiple end points, and multiple lessons. JAMA 289 (2003) 2575-2577
3. Cleland J.G., Louis A.A., Rigby A.S., Janssens U., and Balk A.H. Noninvasive home telemonitoring for patients with heart failure at high risk of recurrent admission and death. the Trans-European Network-Home-Care Management System (TEN-HMS) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 45 (2005) 1654-1664
4. Franciosa J.A., Taylor A.L., Cohn J.N., et al. African-American Heart Failure Trial (A-HeFT). rationale, design, and methodology. J Card Fail 8 (2002) 128-135