FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 351:2448-2450 December 2, 2004 Number 23 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by Juurlink, D. N. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The data presented by Juurlink et al. (Aug. 5 issue)¹ regarding hyperkalemia that was attributed to spironolactone do not justify the conclusion that the rate of admission for hyperkalemia increased. The authors identified "all hospital admissions involving a diagnosis of hyperkalemia," and their database included "up to 16 diagnoses for each admission." They did not review individual records. Therefore, they could not distinguish admissions for hyperkalemia from admissions for other diagnoses that involved hyperkalemia. They should have excluded patients with other primary indications for admission before concluding that the rate of admissions for hyperkalemia increased.² Since no . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Koch, E., Otarola, A., Kirschbaum, A. (2005). A landmark for popperian epidemiology: refutation of the randomised Aldactone evaluation study. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 59: 1000-1006 [Abstract] [Full Text]