Raise the bar even higher for primary prevention interventions - Reply

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 172, Issue 17, 2012, Pages 1353-

  Prasad, Vinay ^a   Vandross, Andrae ^b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DRUG APPROVAL; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; NOTE; PRIMARY PREVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SURVIVAL;

EID: 84867157725     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: 15383679     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3963     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. Prasad V, Vandross A. Cardiovascular primary prevention: how high should we set the bar? Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(8):656-659.
2. Tomlinson G, Detsky AS. Composite end points in randomized trials: there is no free lunch. JAMA. 2010;303(3):267-268.
3. Fried TR, Tinetti ME, Towle V, O'Leary JR, Iannone L. Effects of benefits and harms on older persons' willingness to take medication for primary cardiovascular prevention. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(10):923-928.
4. Prasad V, Cifu A. Amedical burden of proof: towards a new ethic. Biosocieties. 2012;7:72-87.
5. Prasad V, Cifu A, Ioannidis JP. Reversals of established medical practices: evidence to abandon ship. JAMA. 2012;307(1):37-38.