iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: http://web.archive.org/web/20090104062443/http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/298/4/401-a
JAMA -- Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality, July 25, 2007, Taylor and Dawsey 298 (4): 401
The Wayback Machine - http://web.archive.org/web/20090104134930/http://jama.ama-assn.org:80/cgi/content/extract/298/4/401-a

You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 298 No. 4, July 25, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Nutrition/ Malnutrition
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: We believe that the approach used in the meta-analysis of mortality in randomized trials of antioxidant supplements by Dr Bjelakovic and colleagues1 erred in several important ways, probably resulting in biased conclusions.

First, the Linxian General Population Nutrition Intervention Trial (NIT)2 was misclassified as a "trial with high risk of bias." This double-blind placebo-controlled trial of 29 584 persons contained all the attributes described by the authors as defining trials with low risk of bias: more than 60% of the target population was enrolled and computer-randomized, and participant characteristics were virtually identical across all supplement groups (no selection bias); all pill bottles were masked throughout the trial (adequate allocation concealment and blinding); all participants were visited monthly to assess adherence and ascertain end points (no performance or detection bias); and follow-up and endpoint ascertainment were essentially complete, with only 0.2% lost to follow-up (no attrition bias). Indeed, the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Philip R. Taylor, MD, ScD
ptaylor@mail.nih.gov

Sanford Dawsey, MD
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
National Cancer Institute
Bethesda, Maryland


RELATED LETTERS

Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality
Demetrius Albanes
JAMA. 2007;298(4):400.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality
Han-Yao Huang, Steven Teutsch, and Eric Bass
JAMA. 2007;298(4):400-401.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality
Harri Hemilä
JAMA. 2007;298(4):401.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Antioxidant Supplements and Mortality—Reply
Lise Lotte Gluud, Goran Bjelakovic, Dimitrinka Nikolova, Rosa G. Simonetti, and Christian Gluud
JAMA. 2007;298(4):402-403.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Mortality in Randomized Trials of Antioxidant Supplements for Primary and Secondary Prevention: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Goran Bjelakovic, Dimitrinka Nikolova, Lise Lotte Gluud, Rosa G. Simonetti, and Christian Gluud
JAMA. 2007;297(8):842-857.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.