A different team of investigators then conducted a formal cost-benefit analysis of the above
results. They aimed to establish a clinically meaningful absolute risk reduction for Prevenblu
in populations at average risk of stomach ulcers.
Using sound and appropriate methods, the investigators concluded that a clinically
meaningful threshold for Prevenblu vs placebo would be an absolute risk reduction of 2% for
the development of stomach ulcers. Using this threshold, apply the terminology presented in
lecture (week 4) to the results of the trial of Prevenblu vs placebo. What can you conclude?
(Select all that apply. You will check MORE THAN ONE box.)
? Prevenblu demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in stomach ulcers versus placebo after 1
year of treatment.
When compared against the threshold of minimally important clinical benefit (a 2% reduction in the
risk of stomach ulcer), the 95% confidence interval suggests that the findings are indeterminate (not
precise enough).
? When compared against the threshold of minimally important clinical benefit (a 2% reduction in the
risk of stomach ulcer), the 95% confidence interval suggests that the findings are negative.
When compared against the threshold of minimally important clinical benefit (a 2% reduction in the
risk of stomach ulcer), the 95% confidence interval suggests that the findings demonstrate a
meaningful benefit.
Because there was a statistically significant reduction in stomach ulcer risk, Prevenblu ought to be
recommended (regardless of a threshold level of benefit).