Observation is a skill. Discovering what is present and also what is absent requires focus, objectivity, and awareness. Van Gogh, The Starry Night. 1889 can be viewed at Museum of Modern Art in New York City.
I like to use art as an interdisciplinary tool when working with clinical data and numeracy. I notice colleagues don't want to raise their hands to admit they don't understand hazard ratios or calculating number needed to treat (NNT)--but will scrunch up their faces and ask questions about what they observe in art.
We can often look at works of art and create a story. If I was to describe the picture above to you and help you "see" it too, what should I say? Should the information be factual and objective or subjective? Would that influence how you visualized the facts?
Cardiovascular Mortality in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Recent Acute Coronary Syndromes From the EXAMINE Trial
RESULTS Rates of CV death were 4.1% for alogliptin and 4.9% for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% CI 0.66, 1.10). A total of 736 patients (13.7%) experienced a first nonfatal CV event (5.9% MI, 1.1% stroke, 3.0% HHF, and 3.8% UA). Compared with patients not experiencing a nonfatal event, the adjusted HR (95% CI) for death was 3.12 after MI (2.13, 4.58; P < 0.0001) 4.96 after HHF (3.29, 7.47; P < 0.0001), 3.08 after stroke (1.29, 7.37; P = 0.011), and 1.66 after UA (0.81, 3.37; P = 0.164). Mortality rates after a nonfatal event were comparable for alogliptin and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS In patients with type 2 diabetes and a recent ACS, the risk of CV death was higher after a postrandomization, nonfatal CV event, particularly heart failure, compared with those who did not experience a CV event. The risk of CV death was similar between alogliptin and placebo.
What is the story?