Archive : Summer
2006
Infographic //
Wrong Number
|
 |
|
“Cuts risk of heart attack by 50%.” When a drugmaker makes such a claim, it’s not entirely spurious. Different statistics can be used to measure a treatment’s effectiveness. But drug advertisements, news reports and even studies often cite information that can overstate effectiveness. Of 359 studies published between 1989 and 1998, all reported relative risk reduction (the rosiest number), whereas only eight included the more conservative “number needed to treat.” Below, how the numbers are crunched and the stories they tell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SOURCES: “BREAST CANCER SCREENING: SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE,” ANNALS
OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, SEPTEMBER 2002; “SCREENING
FOR COLORECTAL CANCER IN ADULTS AT AVERAGE RISK: SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE FOR THE U.S. PREVENTIVE
SERVICES TASK FORCE,”
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, JULY 2002; “SCREENING FOR CANCER: EVALUATING THE EVIDENCE,” AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN,
FEBRUARY 1, 2001; “DANISH GPS’ PERCEPTION OF DISEASE RISK AND BENEFIT OF PREVENTION,” FAMILY PRACTICE,
FEBRUARY 2002; “COMMUNICATING THE BENEFITS
OF CHRONIC PREVENTIVE THERAPY: DOES THE FORMAT
OF EFFICACY DATA DETERMINE PATIENTS’ ACCEPTANCE
OF TREATMENT?,” MEDICAL
DECISION MAKING,
April–June 1995.
|
|
Back to top
Infographic by Flying Chilli
|
|
