Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To give perspective to the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) report.
Design: Review of the report with reference to other current literature.
Result(s): Women's Health Initiative was stopped early because the hazard ratio for breast cancer, although not statistically significant, met a preset Data Safety Monitoring Board statistical parameter that mandated a recommendation to close the study. Data from study years 4 and 5 that drive the statistics developed by the Data Safety Monitoring Board may not hold equal biological significance for clinicians and their patients.
Conclusion(s): Women's Health Initiative has provided limited new data. Providers should resist the knee-jerk call to abandon MHT. Together, patient and provider should assess the benefit that MHT is adding/will add to each individual woman's quality of life.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00994-4 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!