I have been muddling through the UKPDS 33 (Lancet 1998; 352:837-53). I
am impressed with the magnitude of this undertaking. I suspect there
will be much discussion about its findings and how they are applied.
The main results are summarized on page 843 (Figure 4).
When I calculated NNT (based upon aggregate of 963 endpoints/2729
subjects in the intensive control group and 438 endpoints/1138 in the
conventional therapy group, and 10 years of follow up), I come up with
an absolute risk reduction of .032 and NNT = 31.2 for 10 years.
However, in the text on page 847, the authors report NNT of 19.6. Any
insights into why my NNT is different from theirs?
Henry
Henry C. Barry, M.D., M.S.
Associate Professor
Senior Associate Chair
Department of Family Practice
B-104 Clinical Center
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1315
Phone: 517-353-0851 x 456
Fax: 517-355-7700
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|