Literature DB >> 12393077

Hazard rate ratio and prospective epidemiological studies.

M J Symons1, D T Moore.   

Abstract

Analysis of prospective follow-up data usually includes a Cox regression model. When a hazard rate ratio, obtained as the exponential of an estimated regression coefficient from the Cox model, is greater than 1.0, it consistently exceeds relative risk, and is exceeded by the odds ratio. The divergence of these distinct epidemiologic measures increases with the product of three factors: (1) the length of follow-up, (2) the average rate of the end point occurence over the follow-up period, and (3) the magnitude of risk, either above or below 1. Cornfield's rare disease assumption is basically the product of the first two of these factors. However, risks in excess of 2.5 have a powerful effect on the divergence of these measures, and this point has received less emphasis. Conversely, and as seen frequently in applications, relative risk, hazard rate ratio, and odds ratio numerically approximate one another with shorter follow-up, rarer end points, and risks closer to 1. Although the hazard rate ratio is not always distinguished from relative risk, it is commonly close to, and is always between, relative risk and the odds ratio. Consistent and accurate terminology would have us use hazard rate ratio with Cox regression and odds ratio with logistic regression. The term "relative risk" seems to be a default choice, regardless of the model being used. However, when relative risk is the object of the model chosen, as in a Poisson regression approximation of two binomial proportions or an equivalent weighted least squares, then for us, relative risk is the accurate terminology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12393077     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00443-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  86 in total

1.  Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

Authors:  Jill A Hayden; Maria N Wilson; Richard D Riley; Ross Iles; Tamar Pincus; Rachel Ogilvie
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-25

Review 2.  Body mass index and risk of surgical site infection following spine surgery: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dima Y Abdallah; Mutaz M Jadaan; John P McCabe
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Circulating and dietary magnesium and risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Authors:  Liana C Del Gobbo; Fumiaki Imamura; Jason H Y Wu; Marcia C de Oliveira Otto; Stephanie E Chiuve; Dariush Mozaffarian
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 7.045

4.  Increased aortic stiffness predicts future development and progression of peripheral neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes: the Rio de Janeiro Type 2 Diabetes Cohort Study.

Authors:  Claudia R L Cardoso; Camila B M Moran; Fernanda S Marinho; Marcel T Ferreira; Gil F Salles
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 10.122

5.  Spousal diabetes status as a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes: a prospective cohort study and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Duke Appiah; Pamela J Schreiner; Elizabeth Selvin; Ellen W Demerath; James S Pankow
Journal:  Acta Diabetol       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 4.280

6.  Pre-diagnostic vitamin D concentrations and cancer risks in older individuals: an analysis of cohorts participating in the CHANCES consortium.

Authors:  José Manuel Ordóñez-Mena; Ben Schöttker; Veronika Fedirko; Mazda Jenab; Anja Olsen; Jytte Halkjær; Ellen Kampman; Lisette de Groot; Eugene Jansen; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Petra H Peeters; Galatios Siganos; Tom Wilsgaard; Laura Perna; Bernd Holleczek; Ulrika Pettersson-Kymmer; Philippos Orfanos; Antonia Trichopoulou; Paolo Boffetta; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 8.082

7.  Hazard regression models of early mortality in trauma centers.

Authors:  David E Clark; Jing Qian; Robert J Winchell; Rebecca A Betensky
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Use of Antihypertensive Drugs and Risk of Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-analysis of Observational Studies.

Authors:  Huilin Tang; Shuangshuang Fu; Suodi Zhai; Yiqing Song; Jiali Han
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Recent advances in understanding depression in adults with diabetes.

Authors:  Patrick J Lustman; Sue M Penckofer; Ray E Clouse
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.285

10.  Prenatal valproate exposure and risk of autism spectrum disorders and childhood autism.

Authors:  Jakob Christensen; Therese Koops Grønborg; Merete Juul Sørensen; Diana Schendel; Erik Thorlund Parner; Lars Henning Pedersen; Mogens Vestergaard
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 56.272

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.