Abstract
Background Relative measures quantify the effect of an intervention but are difficult to translate into practice. Clinicians prefer absolute measures like the number needed to treat (NNT). We demonstrate a novel approach for reporting treatment effect across an ordered outcome where higher scores indicate worse functional outcome. We used the first and the third International Stroke Trials (IST-1 and IST-3) as case studies.
Highlights
Relative measures quantify the effect of an intervention but are difficult to translate into practice
We demonstrate a novel approach for reporting treatment effect across an ordered outcome where higher scores indicate worse functional outcome
The gain in Oxford Handicap Score (OHS) points per 1000 treated in IST-3 for low risk was 14, for medium risk -295 (95%CI -566 to -19) and for high risk -230 (95%CI -396 to -65)
Summary
Relative measures quantify the effect of an intervention but are difficult to translate into practice. Clinicians prefer absolute measures like the number needed to treat (NNT). We demonstrate a novel approach for reporting treatment effect across an ordered outcome where higher scores indicate worse functional outcome. We used the first and the third International Stroke Trials (IST-1 and IST-3) as case studies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
