0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Editor's Correspondence |

The Importance of Translating Research Skillfully to Benefit the Public—Reply

Jaakko Mursu, PhD; David R. Jacobs, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):449-450. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.39.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Extract

In reply

It is interesting that the Iowa Women's Health Study (IWHS) data, suggesting that many commonly used dietary supplements do not decrease or might even increase mortality,1 were supported by the Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study as described by Tuomainen et al. However, the authors were concerned about potential reverse causality. Some of the IWHS women may have started the use of supplements because of health issues, and thus disease would be a cause for the increased mortality and supplement use, just a marker. However, sensitivity analyses excluding those women who self-reported cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or cancer at baseline yielded results similar to our main findings. Furthermore, supplement users tended to have healthier lifestyle compared with nonusers. Except in the case of iron, where the relatively high dosages indirectly argue that they were used to combat anemic conditions, these findings argue against reverse causality bias. However, we cannot fully exclude the possibility because the IWHS did not assess the motives for the supplement use and incidence of disease was not exhaustively assessed.

Topics

translating

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

March 12, 2012
Rainbow Vogt, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):449-450. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.1864.
CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();