I like this analysis.

However take no notice of this. I am an interventionist and it shows a reduction in some sort of events, when interventionists do our thing, so I am bound to like it.
What I do when I read research is ask myself who organised it and why.

It's not their fault, we are all creatures of habit and are biased.
The meta analysis was by Avi, who is understandably desperate for a resounding victory for PCI.

I am too, but just less energetic in my searching, with every passing disappointment.
It's a bit like the Loch Ness monster.

Quite convincing when I was a kid, that there could be this creature, etc, and we had only verbal reports and the odd shabby picture to work from.
But as the years wear on, and the ubiquity of camera phones etc doesn't lead to an avalanche of more images, my initial optimism on Nessie wears progressively thinner.
If I see a Nessie advocate pointing to a £100 million search for Nessie, and their interpretation is that

"This is a great study because it has now shown that it is safe to look for Nessie, and it means we have lots of Nessie options to discuss",

I start laughing.
In this table there are two very large contemporary studies, can you identify them?

What did they show?
Actually Avi , one thing you could try is ordering them by date, rather than alphabetically. See if it paints a picture.
Or if you want to be more science-y, you could award each trial a number of points based on adding the usage of aspirin (on a scale of 0 if no one taking, to 1 if all taking), statin (0 for no one taking, 1 for say atorva 40 in all, and some small fraction for Simva)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Prof Darrel Francis ☺ Mk CardioFellows Great Again

Prof Darrel Francis ☺ Mk CardioFellows Great Again Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ProfDFrancis

4 Apr
When this happens ...
What be your response?
Happily the plumber fixes it. He explains that this is a problem with blockage in the pipes that he had to clear.

You tell your neighbour about your lucky escape with your life.
Read 36 tweets
23 Dec 20
Tony Blair is (for once) right that the most efficient use of the limited vaccine supplies would be to give everyone (who wants it) one dose, and once that is all done, and more vaccine is available, go back for 2nd doses.
HOWEVER, much as I love to kick the government, I can see fully why they are NOT doing this.

If I was the head of my village in Outer Francisia, and I had only n vaccine doses for my n people, I would give them all 1 each. (If I had less, I would give to the most at-risk)
... based on this startling graph
Read 49 tweets
15 Dec 20
Very interesting question. People do still seem to misunderstand that creatures need to have an aim in mind when they do things.

The beauty of life was that it needs no more explanation than a ball rolling down a hill.
You could say that the ball "wants" to go lower if possible. But ultimately it is being dragged that way by gravity.

We can use the term "want" loosely, when describing inanimate objects:

"The heat in this oven wants to spread out evenly"

But we know it is only shorthand
The mistake that leads people to think that viruses and other creatures particularly want to spread, is that Darwin's principle is often quoted as "Survival of the fittest", and we often misunderstand that as "Survival of the fittest creature".
Read 22 tweets
9 Dec 20
Because of the 0.3%, i.e. 180,000 who die, and the few million who end up ill in hospital.

1. Because despite having lived cosseted lives where everything is provided for us from cradle to grave, be it food, security, education, healthcare, or law and order,

SOMEHOW many young people I come across seem to have a higher sense of civic virtue than you...
Read 13 tweets
8 Dec 20
Yes that sentence made me laugh.

Of course it can't be "stenosis per se" because there is no single index of "stenosis per se" for a patient.
If you had a high resolution map of everything what would you use?

How about tightest percent stenosis anywhere in coro?
If you thought it was great then you are going to rate a person with an isolated 75% stenosis of the distal RCA worse than a person with five 70%ish stenoses of each of the LAD, CX, RCA, Om1 and D1.
Read 19 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!