Talk:RE-ALIGN

Does it also amuse anyone else that population A had 5/3 major bleeds, but population A + B has 4/2? - Ling

Before making usable

Keep in mind that this is a phase II trial, which wasn't really a comparison of efficacy endpoints. This was a dose-finding study that happened to be closed early because of a safety signal that showed inferiority of dabigatran in both efficacy and safety endpoints. --Dave Iberri (talk) 09:42, 14 October 2013 (PDT)

True, the authors state that the "primary aim... was to validate a new regimen for the administration of dabigatran to prevent thromboembolic complications in patients with mechanical heart valves." (pg. 1207) The thing that makes this trial interesting is the safety endpoints. Both should be given consideration with safety getting the greater emphasis. --Tim Plante (talk) 10:02, 14 October 2013 (PDT)

I'd also like to see some of the formatting changed. Haven't gotten around to actually making the edits myself, though. Right now I'm still copyediting. --Dave Iberri (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2013 (PDT)

Editorial

Make sure to check it out! [1] --Tim Plante (talk) 04:36, 15 October 2013 (PDT)

It's a little apologetic but I agree that we need to include it in our discussion. --Dave Iberri (talk) 08:22, 15 October 2013 (PDT)