Literature DB >> 25726522

Relative risk reduction is useful metric to standardize effect size for public heath interventions for translational research.

Ali Mirzazadeh1, Mohsen Malekinejad2, James G Kahn2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Heterogeneity of effect measures in intervention studies undermines the use of evidence to inform policy. Our objective was to develop a comprehensive algorithm to convert all types of effect measures to one standard metric, relative risk reduction (RRR). STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: This work was conducted to facilitate synthesis of published intervention effects for our epidemic modeling of the health impact of human immunodeficiency virus [HIV testing and counseling (HTC)]. We designed and implemented an algorithm to transform varied effect measures to RRR, representing the proportionate reduction in undesirable outcomes.
RESULTS: Our extraction of 55 HTC studies identified 473 effect measures representing unique combinations of intervention-outcome-population characteristics, using five outcome metrics: pre-post proportion (70.6%), odds ratio (14.0%), mean difference (10.2%), risk ratio (4.4%), and RRR (0.9%). Outcomes were expressed as both desirable (29.5%, eg, consistent condom use) and undesirable (70.5%, eg, inconsistent condom use). Using four examples, we demonstrate our algorithm for converting varied effect measures to RRR and provide the conceptual basis for advantages of RRR over other metrics.
CONCLUSION: Our review of the literature suggests that RRR, an easily understood and useful metric to convey risk reduction associated with an intervention, is underused by original and review studies.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision making; Effect measures; Hazard ratio; Odds ratio; Relative risk reduction; Risk factor; Risk ratio

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25726522      PMCID: PMC5935495          DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   7.407


  21 in total

1.  Misunderstandings about the effects of race and sex on physicians' referrals for cardiac catheterization.

Authors:  L M Schwartz; S Woloshin; H G Welch
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-07-22       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes.

Authors:  L A McNutt; J P Hafner; X Xue
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-11       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  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

4.  Average attributable fractions: a coherent theory for apportioning excess risk to individual risk factors and subpopulations.

Authors:  Geir Egil Eide; Ivar Heuch
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.207

5.  Comparison of confidence intervals for adjusted attributable risk estimates under multinomial sampling.

Authors:  Andrea Lehnert-Batar; Annette Pfahlberg; Olaf Gefeller
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.207

6.  What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes.

Authors:  J Zhang; K F Yu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-11-18       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Use and misuse of population attributable fractions.

Authors:  B Rockhill; B Newman; C Weinberg
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Effect of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody knowledge on high-risk sexual behavior with steady and nonsteady sexual partners among homosexual men.

Authors:  G J van Griensven; E M de Vroome; R A Tielman; J Goudsmit; F de Wolf; J van der Noordaa; R A Coutinho
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Letter: Definitions of attributable risk.

Authors:  A Leviton
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1973-09       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Efficacy of voluntary HIV-1 counselling and testing in individuals and couples in Kenya, Tanzania, and Trinidad: a randomised trial. The Voluntary HIV-1 Counseling and Testing Efficacy Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-07-08       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: expressing and interpreting associations and effect sizes in clinical outcome assessments.

Authors:  Lori D McLeod; Joseph C Cappelleri; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 7.045

2.  Associations of tobacco retailer density and proximity with adult tobacco use behaviours and health outcomes: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joseph G L Lee; Amanda Y Kong; Kerry B Sewell; Shelley D Golden; Todd B Combs; Kurt M Ribisl; Lisa Henriksen
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 6.953

3.  Effect of genetics clinical decision support tools on health-care providers' decision making: a mixed-methods systematic review.

Authors:  Agnes Sebastian; June C Carroll; Leslie E Oldfield; Chloe Mighton; Salma Shickh; Elizabeth Uleryk; Yvonne Bombard
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  The effectiveness of behaviour change interventions delivered by non-dental health workers in promoting children's oral health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mehreen Riaz Faisal; Masuma Pervin Mishu; Faisal Jahangir; Sabahat Younes; Omara Dogar; Kamran Siddiqi; David J Torgerson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.