Literature DB >> 18291556

Estimating relative risks for common outcome using PROC NLP.

Binbing Yu1, Zhuoqiao Wang.   

Abstract

In cross-sectional or cohort studies with binary outcomes, it is biologically interpretable and of interest to estimate the relative risk or prevalence ratio, especially when the response rates are not rare. Several methods have been used to estimate the relative risk, among which the log-binomial models yield the maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) of the parameters. Because of restrictions on the parameter space, the log-binomial models often run into convergence problems. Some remedies, e.g., the Poisson and Cox regressions, have been proposed. However, these methods may give out-of-bound predicted response probabilities. In this paper, a new computation method using the SAS Nonlinear Programming (NLP) procedure is proposed to find the MLEs. The proposed NLP method was compared to the COPY method, a modified method to fit the log-binomial model. Issues in the implementation are discussed. For illustration, both methods were applied to data on the prevalence of microalbuminuria (micro-protein leakage into urine) for kidney disease patients from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. The sample SAS macro for calculating relative risk is provided in the appendix.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18291556      PMCID: PMC2365041          DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2007.12.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed        ISSN: 0169-2607            Impact factor:   5.428


  17 in total

1.  Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes.

Authors:  Louise-Anne McNutt; Chuntao Wu; Xiaonan Xue; Jean Paul Hafner
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2003-05-15       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data.

Authors:  Guangyong Zou
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2004-04-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit in log binomial regression.

Authors:  L Blizzard; D W Hosmer
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.207

4.  Binomial regression in GLIM: estimating risk ratios and risk differences.

Authors:  S Wacholder
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Covariance analysis of censored survival data.

Authors:  N Breslow
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1974-03       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Risk ratio and rate ratio estimation in case-cohort designs: hypertension and cardiovascular mortality.

Authors:  E G Schouten; J M Dekker; F J Kok; S Le Cessie; H C Van Houwelingen; J Pool; J P Vanderbroucke
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1993-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Odds ratio or relative risk for cross-sectional data?

Authors:  J Lee
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 7.196

8.  Use of the prevalence ratio v the prevalence odds ratio as a measure of risk in cross sectional studies.

Authors:  O Axelson; M Fredriksson; K Ekberg
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 4.402

9.  Effect of intensive therapy on the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. The Diabetes Control and Complications (DCCT) Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 10.612

10.  Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio.

Authors:  Aluísio J D Barros; Vânia N Hirakata
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2003-10-20       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  3 in total

1.  Estimating the Relative Excess Risk Due to Interaction in Clustered-Data Settings.

Authors:  Katharine Correia; Paige L Williams
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Progression of coronary artery calcification in black and white women: do the stresses and rewards of multiple roles matter?

Authors:  Imke Janssen; Lynda H Powell; Mateusz S Jasielec; Karen A Matthews; Steven M Hollenberg; Kim Sutton-Tyrrell; Susan A Everson-Rose
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2012-02

3.  Comparison of robustness to outliers between robust poisson models and log-binomial models when estimating relative risks for common binary outcomes: a simulation study.

Authors:  Wansu Chen; Jiaxiao Shi; Lei Qian; Stanley P Azen
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 4.615

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.