Good statistics but clinically irrelevant for a practitioner (DPP4-I vs SGLT2-I). The recent comparison about the risk of amputations with SGLT2-Inhibitors in JAMA Internal Medicine is a shocker of sorts. When will clinical researchers learn about the requirements of Clinical Practice? Sensational journalism seems to be increasing in the world of medical publications too. The central point of irrelevance is that a "category" of drugs is never ever prescribed to a patient ... only 1 drug from the category is prescribed.
Thus, what is the relevance of an article comparing risks of some (any) end-point between categories? The problems are: 1. It is obviously irrelevant for a clinical practitioner in making a clinical decision since a clinician never prescribes a "class" but a "molecule". And some attributes of a molecule might be unique and not part of the group. There are numerous such…
