Linked Life Data

16586306

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/16586306

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
5
pubmed:dateCreated
2006-5-8
pubmed:abstractText
Evidence increases that reliance on surrogate endpoints may be detrimental. This is particularly relevant for preventive medicine. Most impressive examples are hormone replacement therapy, vitamin therapy, and drug treatment of cardiovascular risk factors. Only a few of the oral antidiabetic agents have been studied in randomised trials using clinically relevant outcome measures. Most of these drugs or drug combinations turned out to be more dangerous than beneficial. They increased morbidity and mortality despite their blood glucose lowering effects (surrogate endpoints). New compounds are used without evidence of clinical benefit in millions of people worldwide. There is also an increasing number of examples on surrogate end point fallacies related to non-drug interventions (psychological, nursing, educational, social policy).
pubmed:language
ger
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
May
pubmed:issn
0937-2032
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
56
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
193-201
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2006
pubmed:articleTitle
[Surrogate end point fallacies -- the urge for randomized trials with clinical endpoints].
pubmed:affiliation
Universität Hamburg, MIN-Fakultät, Fachwissenschaft Gesundheit. Ingrid_Muehlhauser@uni-hamburg.de
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, English Abstract, Review