Absolute risk reductions, relative risks, relative risk reductions, and numbers needed to treat can be obtained from a logistic regression model

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 63, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 2-6

  Austin, Peter C ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EVALUATIVE SCIENCES   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Absolute risk reduction; Logistic regression; Measures of treatment effect; Number needed to treat; Odds ratio; Relative risk; Relative risk reduction; Risk difference; Statistical methods

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; COHORT ANALYSIS; COVARIANCE; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROGNOSIS; RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL-COA REDUCTASE INHIBITORS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; ONTARIO; RISK REDUCTION BEHAVIOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 70649092017     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Schechtman E. Odds ratio, relative risk, absolute risk reduction, and the number needed to treat-which of these should we use?. Value Health 5 (2002) 431-436
2. Cook R.J., and Sackett D.L. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 310 (1995) 452-454
3. Jaeschke R., Guyatt G., Shannon H., Walter S., Cook D., and Heddle N. Basis statistics for clinicians 3: assessing the effects of treatment: measures of association. Can Med Assoc J 152 (1995) 351-357
4. Sinclair J.C., and Bracken M.B. Clinically useful measures of effect in binary analyses of randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol 47 (1994) 881-889
5. http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors/types-of-article/research. Accessed March 27, 2008.
6. McNutt L.A., Wu C., Xue X., and Hafner J.P. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol 157 (2003) 940-943
7. Greenland S. Interpretation and choice of effect measures in epidemiologic analyses. Am J Epidemiol 125 (1987) 761-768
8. Newcombe R.G. A deficiency of the odds ratio as a measure of effect size. Stat Med 25 (2006) 4235-4240
9. Austin P.C., and Stafford J. The performance of two data-generation processes for data with specified marginal treatment odds ratios. Commun Stat Simul Comput 37 (2008) 1039-1051
10. Efron B., and Tibshirani R.J. An introduction to the bootstrap (1993), Chapman & Hall, New York, NY
11. Tu J.V., Donovan L.R., Lee D.S., Austin P.C., Ko D.T., Wang J.T., et al. Quality of cardiac care in Ontario-phase 1. Report 1 (2004), Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto
12. Austin P.C., and Mamdani M.M. A comparison of propensity score methods: a case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use. Stat Med 25 (2006) 2084-2106
13. Austin P.C., and Tu J.V. Comparing clinical data with administrative data for producing AMI report cards. J R Stat Soc Ser A 169 (2006) 115-126
14. Austin P.C. A comparison of classification and regression trees, logistic regression, generalized additive models, and multivariate adaptive regression splines for predicting AMI mortality. Stat Med 26 (2007) 2937-2957
15. Zhang J., and Yu K.F. What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA 280 (1998) 1690-1691
16. Gail M.H., Wieand S., and Piantadosi S. Biased estimates of treatment effect in randomized experiments with nonlinear regressions and omitted covariates. Biometrika 7 (1984) 431-444
17. Senn S. Testing for baseline balance in clinical trials. Stat Med 13 (1994) 1715-1726
18. Senn S.J. Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials. Stat Med 8 (1989) 467-475
19. Altman D.G., and Dore C.J. Baseline comparisons in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 10 (1991) 797-802
20. Lavori P.W., Louis T.A., Bailar III J.C., and Polansky M. Designs for experiments-parallel comparisons of treatment. N Engl J Med 309 (1983) 1291-1298
21. Austin P.C. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating relative risks. J Clin Epidemiol 61 (2008) 537-545
22. Austin P.C. A critical appraisal of propensity score matching in the medical literature from 1996 to 2003. Stat Med 27 (2008) 2037-2049
23. Austin P.C. Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 134 (2007) 1128-1135