Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Randomised trials are subject to interpretation bias as shown by the example of the UK prospective diabetes study. The UK prospective diabetes study shows no benefit on macrovascular end points in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with sulphonylureas or insulin over 10 years. The study shows a clinically important benefit on macrovascular end points from metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes that seems somewhat independent of the drug's ability to lower blood glucose concentrations. Nevertheless, many authors, journal editors, and the wider scientific community interpreted the study as providing evidence of the benefit of intensive glucose control. Journal editors should be aware of this important potentialbias and encourage authors to present their results initially with, a minimum of discussion so as to invite a range of comments and perspectives from readers.

Original publication




Journal article


British Medical Journal

Publication Date





1720 - 1723