分布相互作用:使用发生率比值比评估相互作用时的解释问题。

Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I Pub Date : 2005-03-03 eCollection Date: 2005-01-01 DOI:10.1186/1742-5573-2-1
Ulka B Campbell, Nicolle M Gatto, Sharon Schwartz
{"title":"分布相互作用:使用发生率比值比评估相互作用时的解释问题。","authors":"Ulka B Campbell,&nbsp;Nicolle M Gatto,&nbsp;Sharon Schwartz","doi":"10.1186/1742-5573-2-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is well known that the incidence odds ratio approximates the risk ratio when the disease of interest is rare, but increasingly overestimates the risk ratio as the disease becomes more common. However when assessing interaction, incidence odds ratios may not approximate risk ratios even when the disease is rare. We use the term \"distributional interaction\" to refer to interaction that appears when using incidence odds ratios that does not appear, or appears to a lesser degree, when using risk ratios. The interpretational problems that arise from this discrepancy can have important implications in epidemiologic research. Therefore, quantification of the relationship between the interaction odds ratio and the interaction risk ratio is warranted. In this paper, we provide a formula to quantify the differences between incidence odds ratios and risk ratios when they are used to estimate effect modification on a multiplicative scale. Using this formula, we examine the conditions under which these two estimates diverge. Furthermore, we expand this discussion to the implications of using incidence odds ratios to assess effect modification on an additive scale. Finally, we illustrate how distributional interaction arises and the problems that it causes using an example from the literature. Whenever the risk of the outcome variable is non-negligible, distributional interaction is possible. This is true even when the disease is rare (e.g., disease risk is less than 5%). Therefore, when assessing interaction on either an additive or multiplicative scale, caution should be taken in interpreting interaction estimates based on incidence odds ratios.</p>","PeriodicalId":87082,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","volume":"2 ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1742-5573-2-1","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distributional interaction: Interpretational problems when using incidence odds ratios to assess interaction.\",\"authors\":\"Ulka B Campbell,&nbsp;Nicolle M Gatto,&nbsp;Sharon Schwartz\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1742-5573-2-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>It is well known that the incidence odds ratio approximates the risk ratio when the disease of interest is rare, but increasingly overestimates the risk ratio as the disease becomes more common. However when assessing interaction, incidence odds ratios may not approximate risk ratios even when the disease is rare. We use the term \\\"distributional interaction\\\" to refer to interaction that appears when using incidence odds ratios that does not appear, or appears to a lesser degree, when using risk ratios. The interpretational problems that arise from this discrepancy can have important implications in epidemiologic research. Therefore, quantification of the relationship between the interaction odds ratio and the interaction risk ratio is warranted. In this paper, we provide a formula to quantify the differences between incidence odds ratios and risk ratios when they are used to estimate effect modification on a multiplicative scale. Using this formula, we examine the conditions under which these two estimates diverge. Furthermore, we expand this discussion to the implications of using incidence odds ratios to assess effect modification on an additive scale. Finally, we illustrate how distributional interaction arises and the problems that it causes using an example from the literature. Whenever the risk of the outcome variable is non-negligible, distributional interaction is possible. This is true even when the disease is rare (e.g., disease risk is less than 5%). Therefore, when assessing interaction on either an additive or multiplicative scale, caution should be taken in interpreting interaction estimates based on incidence odds ratios.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1742-5573-2-1\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-2-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2005/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-2-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2005/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

摘要

众所周知,发病率比值比近似于所研究疾病罕见时的风险比,但随着疾病越来越常见,其风险比就会越来越高估。然而,在评估相互作用时,即使疾病罕见,发生率优势比也不能近似于风险比。我们使用术语“分布相互作用”来指在使用发生率比值比时出现的相互作用,而在使用风险比时没有出现或出现的程度较低。由这种差异引起的解释问题可能对流行病学研究产生重要影响。因此,量化相互作用优势比和相互作用风险比之间的关系是必要的。在本文中,我们提供了一个公式来量化发生率优势比和风险比之间的差异,当它们被用于估计乘数尺度上的效果修正时。利用这个公式,我们检验了这两个估计发散的条件。此外,我们将讨论扩展到使用发生率比值比在加性尺度上评估效果改变的含义。最后,我们用文献中的一个例子来说明分布相互作用是如何产生的以及它所引起的问题。每当结果变量的风险不可忽略时,分布相互作用是可能的。即使这种疾病很罕见(例如,患病风险低于5%),情况也是如此。因此,在以加性或乘性尺度评估相互作用时,应谨慎地解释基于发生率比值比的相互作用估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Distributional interaction: Interpretational problems when using incidence odds ratios to assess interaction.

It is well known that the incidence odds ratio approximates the risk ratio when the disease of interest is rare, but increasingly overestimates the risk ratio as the disease becomes more common. However when assessing interaction, incidence odds ratios may not approximate risk ratios even when the disease is rare. We use the term "distributional interaction" to refer to interaction that appears when using incidence odds ratios that does not appear, or appears to a lesser degree, when using risk ratios. The interpretational problems that arise from this discrepancy can have important implications in epidemiologic research. Therefore, quantification of the relationship between the interaction odds ratio and the interaction risk ratio is warranted. In this paper, we provide a formula to quantify the differences between incidence odds ratios and risk ratios when they are used to estimate effect modification on a multiplicative scale. Using this formula, we examine the conditions under which these two estimates diverge. Furthermore, we expand this discussion to the implications of using incidence odds ratios to assess effect modification on an additive scale. Finally, we illustrate how distributional interaction arises and the problems that it causes using an example from the literature. Whenever the risk of the outcome variable is non-negligible, distributional interaction is possible. This is true even when the disease is rare (e.g., disease risk is less than 5%). Therefore, when assessing interaction on either an additive or multiplicative scale, caution should be taken in interpreting interaction estimates based on incidence odds ratios.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Extending the sufficient component cause model to describe the Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (SUTVA). Use of the integrated health interview series: trends in medical provider utilization (1972-2008). Social network analysis and agent-based modeling in social epidemiology. The use of complete-case and multiple imputation-based analyses in molecular epidemiology studies that assess interaction effects. Attributing the burden of cancer at work: three areas of concern when examining the example of shift-work.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1