Literature DB >> 8549701

To use or not to use the odds ratio in epidemiologic analyses?

M Nurminen1.   

Abstract

This paper argues that the use of the odds ratio parameter in epidemiology needs to be considered with a view to the specific study design and the types of exposure and disease data at hand. Frequently, the odds ratio measure is being used instead of the risk ratio or the incidence-proportion ratio in cohort studies or as an estimate for the incidence-density ratio in case-referent studies. Therefore, the analyses of epidemiologic data have produced biased estimates and the presentation of results has been misleading. However, the odds ratio can be relinquished as an effect measure for these study designs; and, the application of the case-base sampling approach permits the incidence ratio and difference measures to be estimated without any untenable assumptions. For the Poisson regression, the odds ratio is not a parameter of interest; only the risk or rate ratio and difference are relevant. For the conditional logistic regression in matched case-referent studies, the odds ratio remains useful, but only when it is interpreted as an estimate of the incidence-density ratio. Thus the odds ratio should, in general, give way to the incidence ratio and difference as the measures of choice for exposure effect in epidemiology.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8549701     DOI: 10.1007/bf01721219

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0393-2990            Impact factor:   8.082


  27 in total

1.  Estimability and estimation in case-referent studies.

Authors:  O Miettinen
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1976-02       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  A method of estimating comparative rates from clinical data; applications to cancer of the lung, breast, and cervix.

Authors:  J CORNFIELD
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1951-06       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Principles of nonexperimental assessment of excess risk, with special reference to adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  O S Miettinen; J J Caro
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  The rare-disease assumption revisited. A critique of "estimators of relative risk for case-control studies".

Authors:  S Greenland; D C Thomas; H Morgenstern
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding.

Authors:  S Greenland; J M Robins
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 7.196

6.  External comparisons with the case-cohort design.

Authors:  S Wacholder; J F Boivin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Neck trouble in machine operating, dynamic physical work and sedentary work: a prospective study on occupational and individual risk factors.

Authors:  E Viikari-Juntura; H Riihimäki; S Tola; T Videman; P Mutanen
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 6.437

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

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

9.  Design options in epidemiologic research. An update.

Authors:  O Miettinen
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 5.024

10.  Confounding: essence and detection.

Authors:  O S Miettinen; E F Cook
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 4.897

View more
  30 in total

1.  Pushing and pulling in association with low back and shoulder complaints.

Authors:  M J M Hoozemans; A J van der Beek; M H W Frings-Dresen; L H V van der Woude; F J H van Dijk
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.402

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.  Age and Age Discordance Associations with Condomless Sex Among Men Who Have Sex with Men.

Authors:  Homero E Del Pino; Nina T Harawa; Diana Liao; Alison A Moore; Arun S Karlamangla
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2018-02

Review 4.  Case-control studies in pharmacoeconomic research: an overview.

Authors:  J Jaime Caro; Krista F Huybrechts
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Prevalence odds ratio or prevalence ratio in the analysis of cross sectional data: what is to be done?

Authors:  M L Thompson; J E Myers; D Kriebel
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.402

6.  Havens of risks or resources? A study of two Latino neighborhoods in New York City.

Authors:  Mariana C Martins; José E Diaz; Raziel Valiño; Naa Oyo A Kwate; Ana F Abraido-Lanza
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.671

7.  One-year predictors of smoking initiation and of continued smoking among elementary schoolchildren in multiethnic, low-income, inner-city neighbourhoods.

Authors:  J O'Loughlin; G Paradis; L Renaud; L Sanchez Gomez
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  Predicting the timeline to the final menstrual period: the study of women's health across the nation.

Authors:  Gail A Greendale; Shinya Ishii; Mei-Hua Huang; Arun S Karlamangla
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 5.958

9.  Prevalence odds ratio versus prevalence ratio: choice comes with consequences.

Authors:  Ashutosh R Tamhane; Andrew O Westfall; Greer A Burkholder; Gary R Cutter
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Association between transient hypothyroxinaemia of prematurity and adult autism spectrum disorder in a low-birthweight cohort: an exploratory study.

Authors:  Steven J Korzeniewski; Jennifer A Pinto-Martin; Agnes H Whitaker; Judith F Feldman; John M Lorenz; Susan E Levy; Tammy Z Movsas; Athina Pappas; Nigel Paneth
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 3.980

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.