Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
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 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 (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Surtees, P.
Right arrow Articles by Day, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Surtees, P.
Right arrow Articles by Day, N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159:1203-1204.
Copyright © 2004 by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

THE AUTHORS REPLY

Paul Surtees1, Nicholas Wainwright1, Robert Luben1, Kay-Tee Khaw2 and Nicholas Day1

1 Strangeways Research Laboratory, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
2 Clinical Gerontology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom

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

We thank Dr. Macleod and colleagues for their comments (1). Macleod et al. make a number of broad-ranging observations on our recent paper (2) and another, unrelated publication (3) that concern residual confounding, disease-specific associations, clarity in risk factor specification, and interpretation of results. These issues are central to the professional practice of public health observational epidemiology but . . . [Full Text of this Article]


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