Skip Navigation


IJE Advance Access originally published online on May 27, 2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
33/3/459    most recent
dyh122v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kuller, L. H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kuller, L. H
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 33, Number 3, pp. 459-460
IJE vol.33 no.3 © International Epidemiological Association 2004; all rights reserved.

Commentary

Commentary: Hazards of studying women: the oestrogen oestrogen/progesterone dilemma

Lewis H Kuller

Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, GSPH, 130 North Bellefield Avenue, Room 550, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. E-mail: kullerl@edc.pitt.edu

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The recent report from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) of lack of benefit of oestrogen and progesterone (E+P) therapy in reducing the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) has generated considerable discussion within the epidemiology community as to the importance of observational studies.1–6 The results of the WHI are not an isolated phenomenon. Rather, as has been noted, a series of clinical trials have documented lack of benefit of oestrogen alone or E+P therapy in both primary and secondary prevention of CHD as well as in the . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. S. Linet
Invited Commentary: Postmenopausal Unopposed Estrogen and Breast Cancer Risk in the Women's Health Initiative--Before and Beyond
Am. J. Epidemiol., June 15, 2008; 167(12): 1416 - 1420.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin TrialsHome page
G. L. Anderson, C. Kooperberg, N. Geller, J. E. Rossouw, M. Pettinger, and R. L. Prentice
Monitoring and reporting of the Women's Health Initiative randomized hormone therapy trials
Clinical Trials, June 1, 2007; 4(3): 207 - 217.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
N. Krieger, I. Lowy, R. Aronowitz, J. Bigby, K. Dickersin, E. Garner, J.-P. Gaudilliere, C. Hinestrosa, R. Hubbard, P. A Johnson, et al.
Hormone replacement therapy, cancer, controversies, and women's health: historical, epidemiological, biological, clinical, and advocacy perspectives
J. Epidemiol. Community Health, September 1, 2005; 59(9): 740 - 748.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
R. L. Prentice, R. Langer, M. L. Stefanick, B. V. Howard, M. Pettinger, G. Anderson, D. Barad, J. D. Curb, J. Kotchen, L. Kuller, et al.
Combined Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy and Cardiovascular Disease: Toward Resolving the Discrepancy between Observational Studies and the Women's Health Initiative Clinical Trial
Am. J. Epidemiol., September 1, 2005; 162(5): 404 - 414.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
G. D. Smith
Classics in epidemiology: should they get it right?
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2004; 33(3): 441 - 442.
[Full Text] [PDF]