1
LETTER TO THE EDITOR Response to Professor Hagmar’s letter A. Sahlstro¨m Department of Orthopaedics, Malmo ¨ University Hospital, Malmo ¨, Sweden Accepted 16 September 1998 Dear Sir, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the letter from Professor Hagmar. He and some others are disturbed by the fact that we failed to prove a connection between this special type of dynamic weightbearing and knee osteoarthrosis. The ‘sitters’ were 197 all together. This variable was included in the interview because it has been suggested that sitting could cause or possibly even prevent knee osteoarthrosis. The suggestion of Pro- fessor Hagmar to change the analysis after the fact is of cause questionable. Nevertheless, these analyses were performed excluding completely the 197 ‘sitters’. The weightbearing kneebending OR for knee ar- throsis then was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.65–1.67), p 0.879. It is not very useful to make a point of side pro- ducts of a statistical analysis. The possible protective eects of sitting work positions should be studied in a separate analysis including new data. Address for correspondence: Dr A. Sahlstro¨m, Department of Orthopaedics, Malmo¨ University Hospital, S-205 02 Malmo¨, Sweden Phone:+46 40 33 10 00; Fax:+46 33 62 00 European Journal of Epidemiology 15: 199, 1999. Ó 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Response to Professor Hagmar's letter

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Response to Professor Hagmar's letter

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Response to Professor Hagmar's letter

A. SahlstroÈ mDepartment of Orthopaedics, MalmoÈ University Hospital, MalmoÈ, Sweden

Accepted 16 September 1998

Dear Sir,Thank you for the opportunity to comment on theletter from Professor Hagmar. He and some othersare disturbed by the fact that we failed to prove aconnection between this special type of dynamicweightbearing and knee osteoarthrosis.

The `sitters' were 197 all together. This variablewas included in the interview because it has beensuggested that sitting could cause or possibly evenprevent knee osteoarthrosis. The suggestion of Pro-fessor Hagmar to change the analysis after the fact isof cause questionable. Nevertheless, these analyseswere performed excluding completely the 197 `sitters'.

The weightbearing kneebending OR for knee ar-throsis then was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.65±1.67), p� 0.879.

It is not very useful to make a point of side pro-ducts of a statistical analysis. The possible protectivee�ects of sitting work positions should be studied in aseparate analysis including new data.

Address for correspondence: Dr A. SahlstroÈ m, Departmentof Orthopaedics, MalmoÈ University Hospital, S-205 02

MalmoÈ , SwedenPhone:+46 40 33 10 00; Fax:+46 33 62 00

European Journal of Epidemiology 15: 199, 1999.Ó 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.