Dear all
I am very impressed by the discussion about NNTs and the technical issues of
ARR derived by different methods giving varying NNTs. For me an important
message is that NNTs may vary, depending on this (even if that is not the
source of disparity between UKPDS and our own calcularions, based on the
data presented).
However, why does this have to decline into criticism of the research, as in
most recent correspondence?
Anybody interested in addressing these issues could always write to the
authors and the result of that could generate very interesting
correspondence in the journals and this list.
All the best
Terry Aspray
PS I am NOT on the UKPDS team. However, I greatly admire the work.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|