ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2003
Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: calculating benefit and harm in the individual patient.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- American, British and European recommendations for statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease applied to British men studied prospectively.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2006Article
- Assessing the benefit-harm balance at the bedside.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo estimate the absolute reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events and absolute increase in gastrointestinal haemorrhage associated with aspirin for individuals with different baseline risks.
methodsCalculation of absolute treatment effects from estimates of: (i) baseline risks for cardiovascular event and gastrointestinal haemorrhage; and (ii) relative risks of these events with treatment. Baseline cardiovascular risks were derived from existing risk scores, and baseline risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage from an observational cohort study. Changes in relative risks were obtained from clinical trial data. The effects of aspirin treatment were calculated in examples of two individuals with very different baseline risks.
resultsTreatment of a healthy 74-year-old man (blood pressure 144/88 mm Hg and no history of gastrointestinal disorder) would reduce his annual risk of a cardiovascular event from 2% to 1.74% (absolute risk reduction 0.26%, number needed to treat 385), but increase the gastrointestinal haemorrhage risk from 0.3% to 0.51% (absolute risk increase 0.21%, number needed to harm 476). In a 66-year-old obese man, following a transient ischaemic attack, and with a history of hospital treatment for a peptic ulcer, the annual risk of a cardiovascular event would be reduced from 5% to 4.35% (absolute risk reduction 0.65%, number needed to treat 153), but the risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage would increase from 1.08% to 1.83% (absolute risk increase 0.75%, number needed to harm 133).
conclusionsEstimating benefit and harm by taking into account the baseline risks in each individual allows patients and doctors to judge for themselves the magnitude of the trade-offs involved in taking aspirin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.