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

被引:145
作者
Austin, Peter C. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Management Policy & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
Logistic regression; Absolute risk reduction; Relative risk; Relative risk reduction; Number needed to treat; Statistical methods; Measures of treatment effect; Odds ratio; Risk difference; PROPENSITY-SCORE METHODS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; ODDS RATIO; COMMON OUTCOMES; PERFORMANCE; COHORT;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.11.004
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: Logistic regression models are frequently used in cohort studies to determine the association between treatment and dichotomous outcomes in the presence of confounding variables. In a logistic regression model, the association between exposure and outcome is measured using the odds ratio (OR). The OR can be difficult to interpret and only approximates the relative risk (RR) in certain restrictive settings. Several authors have suggested that for dichotomous Outcomes, RRs, RR reductions, absolute risk reductions, and the number needed to treat (NNT) are more clinically meaningful measures of treatment effect. Study Design and Setting: We describe a method for deriving clinically meaningful measures of treatment effect from a logistic regression model. This method involves determining the probability of the outcome if each subject in the cohort was treated and if each subject was untreated. These probabilities are then averaged across the Study cohort to determine the average probability of the outcome in the population if all subjects were treated and if they were untreated. Results: Risk differences, RRs, and NNTs were derived using a logistic regression model. Conclusions: Clinically meaningful measures of effect can be derived from a logistic regression model in a cohort study. These methods can also be used in randomized controlled trials when logistic regression is used to adjust for possible imbalance in prognostically important baseline covariates. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2 / 6
页数:5
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
ALTMAN DG, 1991, STAT MED, V10, P797
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2004, 1 I CLIN EV SCI
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1993, An introduction to the bootstrap
[4]   A comparison of propensity score methods: A case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use [J].
Austin, PC ;
Mamdani, MM .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2006, 25 (12) :2084-2106
[5]   Comparing clinical data with administrative data for producing acute myocardial infarction report cards [J].
Austin, PC ;
Tu, JV .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 2006, 169 :115-126
[6]   The performance of two data-generation processes for data with specified marginal treatment odds ratios [J].
Austin, Peter C. ;
Stafford, James .
COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 2008, 37 (06) :1039-1051
[7]   The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 61 (06) :537-545
[8]   Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: A systematic review and suggestions for improvement [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2007, 134 (05) :1128-U7
[9]   A comparison of regression trees, logistic regression, generalized additive models, and multivariate adaptive regression splines for predicting AMI mortality [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (15) :2937-2957
[10]   THE NUMBER NEEDED TO TREAT - A CLINICALLY USEFUL MEASURE OF TREATMENT EFFECT [J].
COOK, RJ ;
SACKETT, DL .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6977) :452-454