Accurate variance estimation for prevalence ratios

Methods of Information in Medicine

Volumn 46, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 567-571

  Wolkewitz, Martin ^a   Bruckner, T ^b   Schumacher, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Log binomial model; Poisson regression; Prevalence ratio; Robust variance; Underdispersion

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; CHI SQUARE TEST; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SIMULATION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; POISSON DISTRIBUTION;

EID: 35348937736     PISSN: 00261270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1160/ME0416     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Zocchetti C, Consonni D, Bertazzi PA. Relationship between prevalence rate ratios and odds ratios in cross-sectional studies. Int J Epidemiol 1997; 26 (1): 220-223.
2. Fleming-Moran M, Thiagarajah K. Behavioral Interventions and the Role of Television in the Growing Epidemic of Adolescent Obesity: Data from the 2001 Youth Risk Behavioral Survey. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 303-309.
3. Lee J, Chia KS. Use of the prevalence ratio v the prevalence odds ratio as a measure of risk in cross sectional studies. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51 (12): 841.
4. Lee J. Odds ratio or relative risk for cross-sectional data? Int J Epidemiol 1994; 23 (1): 201-203.
5. Thompson ML, Myers JE, Kriebel D. Prevalence odds ratio or prevalence ratio in the analysis of cross sectional data: what is to be done? Occup Environ Med 1998; 55 (4): 272-277.
6. Axelson O, Fredriksson M, Ekberg K. Use of the prevalence ratio v the prevalence odds ratio as a measure of risk in cross sectional studies. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51 (8): 574.
7. Strömberg U. Prevalence odds ratio v prevalence ratio. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51 (2): 143-144.
8. Strömberg U. Prevalence odds ratio v prevalence ratio - some further comments. Occup Environ Med 1995; 52 (2): 143.
9. Lee J, Chia KS. Estimation of prevalence rate ratios for cross sectional data: an example in occupational epidemiology. Br J Ind Med 1993; 50 (9): 861-862.
10. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998.
11. Greenland S. Model-based estimation of relative risks and other epidemiologic measures in studies of common outcomes and in case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 160 (4): 301-305.
12. Zhang J, Yu KF. What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA 198; 280 (19): 1690-1691.
13. McNutt LA, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner JP. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol 2003; 157 (10): 940-943.
14. Skov T, Deddens J, Petersen MR, Endahl L. Prevalence proportion ratios: estimation and hypothesis testing. Int J Epidemiol 1998; 27 (1): 91-95.
15. Blizzard L, Hosmer DW. Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit in log binomial regression. Biometrical Journal 2006; 48 (1): 5-22.
16. Deddens JA, Petersen MR, Lei X; Inc SAS Institute. Estimation of prevalence ratios when PROC GENMOD does not converge. Proceedings of the 28th annual SAS Users Group International conference 2003; pp 270-328.
17. Deddens JA, Petersen MR. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159 (2): 213-214.
18. Rücker G, Schoop R, Beyersmann J, Schumacher M, Zuschneid I. Are KISS Data Representative of German Intensive Care Units? Statistical Issues. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 424-429.
19. Spiegelman D. Easy SAS calculations for risk or prevalence ratios and differences. Am J Epidemiol 2005; 162 (3): 199-200.
20. Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
21. Zou G. A modified Poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159 (7): 702-706.
22. Lachin JM. Biostatistical methods: the assessment of relative risks. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
23. Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003; 3 (1): 21.
24. Behrens T, Taeger T, Wellmann J, Keil U. Different methods to calculate effect estimates in cross-sectional studies: a comparison between prevalence odds ratio and prevalence ratio. Methods Inf Med 2004; 43: 505-509.
25. Silverstein M, Mack C, N R. Effect of a clinic-based referral system to head start: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 292 (8): 968-971.