4 ms·

We can shortcut a bunch of pedantic arguments by just reading their conclusion; > In ambulatory patients with heart failure, a dietary intervention to reduce s

We can shortcut a bunch of pedantic arguments by just reading their conclusion; > In ambulatory patients with heart failure, a dietary intervention to reduce sodium intake did not reduce clinical events. Ambulatory = walking around, e.g. not hospitalized. The patients were already diagnosed with chronic heart failure and were followed for a year to see if a low-sodium diet would prevent further cardiac events. There wasn't statistical evidence that the low-sodium diet did so. Tada!

DoingIsLearning 5y ago
But if they are outpatients is there any guarantee that they were even sticking to a low sodium diet in the first place?
- Ensorceled 5y ago
  So you are saying they are lying in the title when they say "randomised, controlled trial"?
  - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
    You can still have an RCT with self-reported data. The issue being that self-reported is not always accurate.
- mikeyouse 5y ago
  They followed the diets and measured intake -- the low sodium group was instructed to stay under 1,500mg/day -- they didn't quite get there but had substantially lower sodium intake as compared to the 'control'. The study group decreased median sodium intake by 27% compared to the 'control' group who decreased intake by 2%. There's always a issue of 'the human element' in studies like this where people lie and don't follow instructions but claim they did, but good study design and follow-through typically minimize those issues. > Between baseline and 12 months, the median sodium intake decreased from 2286 mg/day (IQR 1653–3005) to 1658 mg/day (1301–2189) in the low sodium group and from 2119 mg/day (1673–2804) to 2073 mg/day (1541–2900) in the usual care group.
PeterisP 5y ago
No, they tried out whether reducing sodium intake beyond the ordinary low-sodium diet helps, and there wasn't statistical evidence for a difference between a low-sodium diet and a extra-low-sodium diet. They did not find (or even try to find) whether a low-sodium diet helps in comparison to a normal, average diet.

DoingIsLearning 5y ago

But if they are outpatients is there any guarantee that they were even sticking to a low sodium diet in the first place?

Ensorceled 5y ago
So you are saying they are lying in the title when they say "randomised, controlled trial"?
- DoingIsLearning 5y ago
  You can still have an RCT with self-reported data. The issue being that self-reported is not always accurate.
mikeyouse 5y ago
They followed the diets and measured intake -- the low sodium group was instructed to stay under 1,500mg/day -- they didn't quite get there but had substantially lower sodium intake as compared to the 'control'. The study group decreased median sodium intake by 27% compared to the 'control' group who decreased intake by 2%. There's always a issue of 'the human element' in studies like this where people lie and don't follow instructions but claim they did, but good study design and follow-through typically minimize those issues. > Between baseline and 12 months, the median sodium intake decreased from 2286 mg/day (IQR 1653–3005) to 1658 mg/day (1301–2189) in the low sodium group and from 2119 mg/day (1673–2804) to 2073 mg/day (1541–2900) in the usual care group.

PeterisP 5y ago

No, they tried out whether reducing sodium intake beyond the ordinary low-sodium diet helps, and there wasn't statistical evidence for a difference between a low-sodium diet and a extra-low-sodium diet. They did not find (or even try to find) whether a low-sodium diet helps in comparison to a normal, average diet.