Literature DB >> 12201860

Odds ratio, relative risk, absolute risk reduction, and the number needed to treat--which of these should we use?

Edna Schechtman1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Statistical analyses of data and making sense of medical data have received much attention in the medical literature, but nevertheless have caused confusion among practitioners. Each researcher provides a different method for comparing treatments. For example, when the end point is binary, such as disease versus no disease, the common measures are odds ratios, relative risk, relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction, and the number needed to treat. The question faced by the practitioner is then: Which one will help me in choosing the best treatment for my patient?
METHODS: The purpose of this paper is to illustrate, using examples, how each measure is used, what it means, and what are its advantages and disadvantages.
RESULTS: Some pairs of measures present equivalent information. Furthermore, it is shown that different measures result in different impressions.
CONCLUSION: It is recommended that researchers report both a relative and an absolute measure and present these with appropriate confidence intervals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12201860     DOI: 10.1046/J.1524-4733.2002.55150.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  47 in total

1.  Indirect comparisons of treatment effects in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Maria Pia Sormani; Alessio Signori
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-02-29       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  What is so odd about odds?

Authors:  Bernard Montreuil; Yves Bendavid; James Brophy
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Clinical practice guidelines for the use of parathyroid hormone in the treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Anthony Hodsman; Alexandra Papaioannou
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Information technology improves Emergency Department patient discharge instructions completeness and performance on a national quality measure: a quasi-experimental study.

Authors:  E J Bell; S S Takhar; J R Beloff; J D Schuur; A B Landman
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 2.342

5.  A new option for definitive burn wound closure - pair matching type of retrospective case-control study of hand burns in the hospitalised patients group in the Dr Stanislaw Sakiel Centre for Burn Treatment between 2009 and 2015.

Authors:  Justyna Glik; Marek Kawecki; Diana Kitala; Agnieszka Klama-Baryła; Wojciech Łabuś; Marek Grabowski; Agata Durdzińska; Mariusz Nowak; Marcelina Misiuga; Aleksandra Kasperczyk
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 6.  A tutorial on methods to estimating clinically and policy-meaningful measures of treatment effects in prospective observational studies: a review.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-01-06       Impact factor: 0.968

7.  Estimating the risk for conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease in an elderly Arab community.

Authors:  Rivka Inzelberg; Magda Massarwa; Edna Schechtman; Rosa Strugatsky; Lindsay A Farrer; Robert P Friedland
Journal:  J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.472

Review 8.  Avoiding selection bias in metabolomics studies: a tutorial.

Authors:  S C Boone; S le Cessie; K Willems van Dijk; R de Mutsert; D O Mook-Kanamori
Journal:  Metabolomics       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 4.290

9.  Effect of communication strategy on personal risk perception and treatment adherence intentions.

Authors:  Sean Young; Daniel M Oppenheimer
Journal:  Psychol Health Med       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.423

10.  Using G-computation to estimate the effect of regionalization of surgical services on the absolute reduction in the occurrence of adverse patient outcomes.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; David R Urbach
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.