For results to be truly scientific and unbiased, you would need to get suitable patients with Aortic stenosis (where a Cardiologist deemed TAVR to be indicated) to be randomised into a properly designed randomised double blind trial to either get 1/ AVR's TAVR or 2/ a competing products TAVR.
Where nobody - the clinician, patient or data collecting team knew which valve the patient received.
For proper scientific outcome, it should have nothing to do with "which company" or "what competitor" is involved.
They would not be involved at all in the scientific process.
All they would do is supply the valve (unmarked and as "blinded" as they could to the operators and those collecting the results).
Cheers
(IMO)
For results to be truly scientific and unbiased, you would need...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 5 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add AVR (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$17.00 |
Change
-0.350(2.02%) |
Mkt cap ! $327.3M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $17.00 | $17.44 | $16.95 | $150.7K | 8.86K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 388 | $17.02 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $17.13 | 35 | 2 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 11.26am 19/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| AVR (ASX) Chart |