 |
|
Does Prayer Really Set One Apart?
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In the article by Harris et al,1 I was struck by the data for Swan-Ganz (S-G) catheterization. In their Table 3, this item appears with a significance level of P=.03. This is not significant because of the number of comparisons made, as properly pointed out by the authors. However, considering the Mid America Heart Institute–Cardiac Care Unit (MAHI-CCU) score weight of 3 for S-G catheterization and the sheer differential number (n=49, 9.4% of the usual care group), it struck me that this may be a possible source of the reported group difference.
I contacted the primary author, Dr Harris, about this issue, and he replied, paraphrasing, that there were many comparisons that could be made and that, regardless, the unweighted CCU scores confirmed his result (W. S. Harris, PhD, written communication, November 1999). This simply restates the published position of Harris et al and does not address the possibility . . . [Full Text of this Article]
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Prayer and Medical Science: A Commentary on the Prayer Study by Harris et al and a Response to Critics
Larry Dossey
Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(12):1735-1738.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit
William S. Harris, Manohar Gowda, Jerry W. Kolb, Christopher P. Strychacz, James L. Vacek, Philip G. Jones, Alan Forker, James H. O'Keefe, and Ben D. McCallister
Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(19):2273-2278.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Prayer and Medical Science: A Commentary on the Prayer Study by Harris et al and a Response to Critics
Dossey
Arch Intern Med 2000;160:1735-1738.
FULL TEXT
|
