IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v28y2008i3p411-418.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Associated with Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Response to the Women's Health Initiative Trial of Combined Hormone Therapy

Author

Listed:
  • Michael L. Power

    (Research Department, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, DC, mpower@acog.org)

  • Jonathan Baron

    (Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)

  • Jay Schulkin

    (Research Department, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, DC)

Abstract

The Women's Health Initiative trial of combined estrogen and progestin (WHI E+P) ended prematurely after preliminary evidence indicated that harms exceeded benefits, with no cardiovascular benefit. There was controversy over the results and the decision to end the trial early, with many obstetrician-gynecologists expressing reservations about the evidence. The Research Department of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists conducted a study regarding the WHI E+P, sending questionnaires to 2500 randomly selected Fellows; 703 Fellows returned usable surveys (28.1%). Despite almost universal awareness of the results of the WHI E+P (> 97%), almost half of the responding physicians did not find the results convincing and disagreed with the decision to stop the trial. In this further examination of the data, we identified characteristics of the respondents who were associated with either accepting or rejecting the WHI E+P. The year residency was completed, the relative importance a respondent attributed to randomized clinical trials (RCTs), concern about harms of action, and opinion of alternative therapies were significant factors. One of 5 respondents found the results convincing and agreed with the decision to end the trial (acceptors). One of 3 respondents did not find the results convincing and disagreed with the decision to end the trial (rejectors). Acceptors had completed residency more recently (1991 v. 1985, P = 0.001), rated evidence from RCTs as more important (P = 0.006), were more concerned with harms of action (22.4% v. 10.6%, P = 0.004), and were more likely to have a favorable opinion of alternative therapies to hormone therapy (64.1% v. 44.4%, P

Suggested Citation

  • Michael L. Power & Jonathan Baron & Jay Schulkin, 2008. "Factors Associated with Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Response to the Women's Health Initiative Trial of Combined Hormone Therapy," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(3), pages 411-418, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:3:p:411-418
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07312722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X07312722
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X07312722?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:3:p:411-418. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.