Literature DB >> 20430578

Logistic regression was preferred to estimate risk differences and numbers needed to be exposed adjusted for covariates.

Ulrich Gehrmann1, Oliver Kuss, Jürgen Wellmann, Ralf Bender.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The estimation of the number needed to be exposed (NNE) with adjustment for covariates can be performed by inverting the corresponding adjusted risk difference. The latter can be estimated by several approaches based on binomial and Poisson regression with or without constraints. A novel proposal is given by logistic regression with average risk difference (LR-ARD) estimation. Finally, the use of ordinary linear regression and unadjusted estimation can be considered. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: LR-ARD is compared with alternative approaches regarding bias, precision, and coverage probability by means of an extensive simulation study.
RESULTS: LR-ARD was found to be superior compared with the other approaches. In the case of balanced covariates and large sample sizes, unadjusted estimation and ordinary linear regression can also be used. In general, however, LR-ARD seems to be the most appropriate approach to estimate adjusted risk differences and NNEs.
CONCLUSIONS: To estimate risk differences and NNEs with adjustment for covariates, the LR-ARD approach should be used.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20430578     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.011

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


  3 in total

1.  Combining directed acyclic graphs and the change-in-estimate procedure as a novel approach to adjustment-variable selection in epidemiology.

Authors:  David Evans; Basile Chaix; Thierry Lobbedez; Christian Verger; Antoine Flahault
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  Model-based estimation of measures of association for time-to-event outcomes.

Authors:  Federico Ambrogi; Elia Biganzoli; Patrizia Boracchi
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-08-09       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  Performance of models for estimating absolute risk difference in multicenter trials with binary outcome.

Authors:  Claudia Pedroza; Van Thi Truong
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 4.615

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.