2018-09-08
Interpretation of results of pooled analysis of individual patient data – Authors' reply
Publication
Publication
The Lancet , Volume 392 - Issue 10150 p. 818
We thank Nick Freemantle and
Domenico Pagano, and Peter Jüni and
colleagues for their comments on our
Article on mortality after coronary
artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus
percutaneous coronary intervention
(PCI), in which we identified important
subgroup differences that might
affect the choice of revascularisation
modality.
Freemantle and Pagano challenge
our conclusions because we performed
no tests for interaction between left
main and multivessel disease and did
not correct for multiplicity. However,
a subgroup analysis according to left
main versus multivessel disease would
be unsound; many patients in the
subgroup with left main disease also
had multivessel disease and therefore
groups were not mutually exclusive.
Hence, testing for a subgroup effect
might risk falsely rejecting the null
hypothesis.
[...]
Additional Metadata | |
---|---|
doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31779-3, hdl.handle.net/1765/110194 | |
The Lancet | |
Organisation | Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery |
Head, S., Papageorgiou, G., Milojevic, M., Stone, G., & Kappetein, A. P. (2018). Interpretation of results of pooled analysis of individual patient data – Authors' reply. The Lancet, 392(10150). doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31779-3 |