A proposal for an additional clinical trial outcome measure assessing preventive effect as delay of events

European Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 27, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 903-909

  Lytsy, Per ^a   Berglund, Lars ^a   Sundström, Johan ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Kaplan Meier survival curves; Preventive measures; Randomized; Treatment Outcome

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DELAY OF EVENT; EVALUATION AND FOLLOW UP; EVENT FREE SURVIVAL; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL TIME; DECISION MAKING; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; METHODOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); TIME;

DECISION MAKING; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; TIME;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84875791432     PISSN: 03932990     EISSN: 15737284     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-012-9752-0     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Hux JE, Naylor CD. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: does the format of efficacy data determine patients' acceptance of treatment? Med Decis Mak 1995;15(2):152-7.
2. Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, Wahrenberger JW, Ross JM. The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8(10):543-8.
3. Forrow L, Taylor WC, Arnold RM. Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions. Am J Med. 1992;92(2):121-4.
4. Bobbio M, Demichelis B, Giustetto G. Completeness of reporting trial results: effect on physicians' willingness to prescribe. Lancet. 1994;343(8907):1209-11.
5. Nexoe J, Gyrd-Hansen D, Kragstrup J, Kristiansen IS, Nielsen JB. Danish GPs' perception of disease risk and benefit of prevention. Fam Pract. 2002;19(1):3-6.
6. Fahey T, Griffiths S, Peters TJ. Evidence based purchasing: understanding results of clinical trials and systematic reviews. BMJ. 1995;311(7012):1056-9. (discussion 1059-1060).
7. Carling CL, Kristoffersen DT, Montori VM, et al. The effect of alternative summary statistics for communicating risk reduction on decisions about taking statins: a randomized trial. PLoS Med. 2009;6(8):e1000134.
8. Koenker R, Hallock KF. Quantile regression. J Econ Perspect. 2001;15(4):143-56.
9. Koenker R. Quantile regression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.
10. Hanney M, Prasher V, Williams N, et al. Memantine for dementia in adults older than 40 years with Down's syndrome (MEADOWS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9815):528-36.
11. Williams PT. Evidence that obesity risk factor potencies are weight dependent, a phenomenon that may explain accelerated weight gain in western societies. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(11):e27657.
12. Burgette LF, Reiter JP, Miranda ML. Exploratory quantile regression with many covariates: an application to adverse birth outcomes. Epidemiology. 2011;22(6):859-66.
13. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Statis Assoc. 1958;53:457-81.
14. Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet. 1994; 344(8934):1383-1389.
15. Efron B. Censored data and the bootstrap. J Am Statis Assoc. 1981;76(374):313-9.
16. Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W, Kurz-Milcke E, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2007;8(2):53-96.
17. Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Mak 2001;21(1):37-44.
18. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966-72.
19. Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Paterson JM, Carter JA, et al. Primary prevention drug therapy: can it meet patients' requirements for reduced risk? Med Decis Mak 2002;22(4):326-39.
20. Kristiansen IS, Gyrd-Hansen D, Nexoe J, Nielsen JB. Number needed to treat: easily understood and intuitively meaningful? Theoretical considerations and a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(9):888-92.
21. McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med. 1982;306(21):1259-62.
22. Dahl R, Gyrd-Hansen D, Kristiansen IS, Nexoe J. Bo Nielsen J. Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:8.
23. Sun L, Zhang Z. A class of transformed mean residual life models with censored survival data. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009;104(486):803-15.
24. Wei G, Schaubel DE. Estimating cumulative treatment effects in the presence of nonproportional hazards. Biometrics. 2008;64(3):724-32.
25. Naimark D, Naglie G, Detsky AS. The meaning of life expectancy: what is a clinically significant gain? J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9(12):702-7.
26. Wright JC, Weinstein MC. Gains in life expectancy from medical interventions - standardizing data on outcomes. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(6):380-6.