Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 19

1.

Number needed to treat: easily understood and intuitively meaningful? Theoretical considerations and a randomized trial.

Kristiansen IS, Gyrd-Hansen D, Nexøe J, Nielsen JB.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2002 Sep;55(9):888-92.

PMID:
12393076
2.

Annualized was found better than absolute risk reduction in the calculation of number needed to treat in chronic conditions.

Mayne TJ, Whalen E, Vu A.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Mar;59(3):217-23. Epub 2005 Oct 13. Review.

PMID:
16488351
3.

Evidence-based dermatology: number needed to treat and its relation to other risk measures.

Manriquez JJ, Villouta MF, Williams HC.

J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007 Apr;56(4):664-71. Epub 2006 Oct 27. Review.

PMID:
17367615
4.

Number needed to treat and number needed to harm are not the best way to report and assess the results of randomised clinical trials.

Hutton JL.

Br J Haematol. 2009 Jun;146(1):27-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2009.07707.x. Epub 2009 Apr 27. Review.

PMID:
19438480
6.

Number-needed-to-treat (NNT)--needs treatment with care.

Christensen PM, Kristiansen IS.

Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2006 Jul;99(1):12-6. Review.

7.

Number needed to treat: solid science or a path to pernicious rationing?

Black HR, Crocitto MT.

Am J Hypertens. 1998 Aug;11(8 Pt 2):128S-134S; discussion 135S-137S. Review.

PMID:
9717854
8.
9.

Pharmacologic myocardial protection in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: a quantitative systematic review.

Stevens RD, Burri H, Tramèr MR.

Anesth Analg. 2003 Sep;97(3):623-33. Review.

PMID:
12933373
10.

Compelling or irrelevant? Using number needed to treat can help decide.

Citrome L.

Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2008 Jun;117(6):412-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2008.01194.x. Review.

PMID:
18479317
11.

Pexelizumab in ischemic heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis on 15,196 patients.

Testa L, Van Gaal WJ, Bhindi R, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Abbate A, Agostoni P, Porto I, Andreotti F, Crea F, Banning AP.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008 Oct;136(4):884-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.12.062. Epub 2008 Jun 18. Review.

12.

Designing randomized, controlled trials aimed at preventing or delaying functional decline and disability in frail, older persons: a consensus report.

Ferrucci L, Guralnik JM, Studenski S, Fried LP, Cutler GB Jr, Walston JD; Interventions on Frailty Working Group.

J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 Apr;52(4):625-34. Review.

PMID:
15066083
13.

Issues in data monitoring and interim analysis of trials.

Grant AM, Altman DG, Babiker AB, Campbell MK, Clemens FJ, Darbyshire JH, Elbourne DR, McLeer SK, Parmar MK, Pocock SJ, Spiegelhalter DJ, Sydes MR, Walker AE, Wallace SA; DAMOCLES study group.

Health Technol Assess. 2005 Mar;9(7):1-238, iii-iv. Review.

14.

Weighing risks and benefits in treating the individual patient.

Sinclair JC.

Clin Perinatol. 2003 Jun;30(2):251-68. Review.

PMID:
12875353
15.

Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials.

Papanikolaou PN, Ioannidis JP.

Am J Med. 2004 Oct 15;117(8):582-9. Review.

PMID:
15465507
16.

Use of steroids in the perinatal period.

Halliday HL.

Paediatr Respir Rev. 2004;5 Suppl A:S321-7. Review.

PMID:
14980290
17.

Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat.

Altman DG.

BMJ. 1998 Nov 7;317(7168):1309-12. Review. No abstract available.

18.
19.

Assessment of clinical significance: the number needed to treat.

Thomas R, Padma P, Braganza A, Muliyil J.

Indian J Ophthalmol. 1996 Jun;44(2):113-5. Review.

Supplemental Content

Support Center