GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Stats] relative risk reduction sells papers, absolute risk reduction makes decisions — 58 comments in the full submission. View in context.
731
c/trialwatch·submitted 4 days ago by u/britta_boateng

[Stats] relative risk reduction sells papers, absolute risk reduction makes decisions

Statsbranch of 7 comments

relative risk reduction sells papers, absolute risk reduction makes decisions. It is the sort of thing everyone half-believes and nobody writes down. The discontinuation numbers were the most useful thing in the paper for me and they were in a supplementary table. Argued for a week about a result and then read the…

Read the full submission and all 58 comments →

This branch

7 comments, started 4 days ago
u/tb500_tangent39 points·4 days ago

This. Intention-to-treat versus completer analysis routinely moves the headline by several points.

replysharereportpermalink
u/britta_boatengOP26 points·4 days ago

SURPASS is the diabetes programme and reports glycaemic endpoints

replysharereportpermalink
u/piotr_bruun11 points·4 days ago

Do you have the publication or the press release?

replysharereportpermalink
u/tb500_tangent27 points·4 days ago

Correction: SURMOUNT is the obesity programme and SURPASS is the diabetes one. The figure you quoted belongs to the other one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/eu_apotheke_a32 points·3 days ago

Small fix — that was the cardiovascular outcomes trial, so weight was a secondary endpoint and the population was different.

replysharereportpermalink
u/hub_opssite staff22 points·3 days ago

discontinuation rate is a result, not a footnote

replysharereportpermalink
u/hamza_zielinski33 points·4 days ago

Relative risk reduction without the baseline rate is uninterpretable. A large relative reduction on a small absolute risk is a small absolute benefit.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/trialwatch

Clinical trial reading group. New readouts, protocol amendments, endpoint definitions, dropout handling, and the difference between a press release and a publication. Absolute risk reduction and number-needed-to-treat are house dialect here.

34kmembers
95submissions
Nov 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Janoshik Analytical

Independent HPLC and mass spec. The number you get is the number they found.

janoshik.comSponsored

GL Biochem (Shanghai)

Custom peptides and amino acids direct from the manufacturer since 1998. ISO 9001 / cGMP. Batch COA every order.

glbiochem.net
More in c/trialwatch
c/trialwatch rules
  1. Press-release-only posts must be flaired Press Release until a publication exists.
  2. Give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body.
  3. Relative risk reduction alone is not a result. Show the absolute numbers.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/trialwatch_theou/forest_plot_fionau/hazard_ratio_halu/renal_outcomes_r
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →