Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
The Relative Merits of Risk Ratios and Odds Ratios

The Relative Merits of Risk Ratios and Odds Ratios

Ratings: (0)|Views: 355 |Likes:
Published by sillewater

More info:

Published by: sillewater on Apr 08, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/08/2012

pdf

text

original

 
REVIEW ARTICLE
The Relative Merits of Risk Ratios and Odds Ratios
Peter Cummings, MD, MPH
W
hen a study outcome is rare in all strata used for an analysis, the odds ratio es-timateofcausaleffectswillapproximatetheriskratio;therefore,oddsratiosfrommost case-control studies can be interpreted as risk ratios. However, if a studyoutcome is common, the odds ratio will be further from 1 than the risk ratio.There is debate regarding the merits of risk ratios compared with odds ratios for the analysis of trials and cohort and cross-sectional studies with common outcomes. Odds ratios are conve-niently symmetrical with regard to the outcome definition; the odds ratio for outcome
is the in-verse of the odds ratio for the outcome not
. Risk ratios lack this symmetry, so it may be neces-sary to present 1 risk ratio for outcome
and another for outcome not
. Risk ratios, but not oddsratios, have a mathematical property called collapsibility; this means that the size of the risk ratiowillnotchangeifadjustmentismadeforavariablethatisnotaconfounder.Becauseofcollapsibil-ity, the risk ratio, assuming no confounding, has a useful interpretation as the ratio change in av-erage risk due to exposure among the exposed. Because odds ratios are not collapsible, they usu-allylackanyinterpretationeitherasthechangeinaverageoddsortheaveragechangeinodds(theaverage odds ratio).
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(5):438-445
Formorethan20years,therehasbeende-bate about the relative merits of risk ratioscompared with odds ratios as estimates of causal associations between an exposure(such as smoking or medication for highbloodpressure)andabinaryoutcome(suchasdeathvslife).Inthisarticle,Idiscusshowthese measures differ and review argu-ments for each. To limit my discussion, Iwill ignore other useful measures of asso-ciation,suchastherateratio,hazardratio,risk difference, and rate difference.
AGREEMENTS REGARDING RISKRATIOS AND ODDS RATIOS
Inaclinicaltrialorcohortstudyinwhichall subjects are followed up for the sametime, the cumulative incidence (averagerisk) of the outcome is
A
 /(
 A
B
) amongthose exposed (
Table 1
) and
C
 /(
C
D
)amongthosenotexposed;thecorrespond-ingoddsare
 A
 / 
B
and
C
 / 
D
,respectively.Therisk ratio is therefore [
 A
 /(
 A
B
)]/[
C
 / (
C
D
)] and the odds ratio is (
 A
 / 
B
)/(
C
 / 
D
). In the literature about these ratios,there are 2 areas where there is generalagreement:iftheoutcomeisrare,theoddsratio will approximate the risk ratio; andin most case-control studies, odds ratioswill approximate risk ratios.
Approximation of Risk Ratios by OddsRatios When Outcomes Are Rare
If the study outcome is rare among thoseexposed (Table 1), then
A
will be smallrelative to
B
, so the risk (
 A
 /[
 A
B
]) willbeclosetotheodds(
 A
 / 
B
).Similarly,iftheoutcome is rare among those not ex-posed, then
C
will be small relative to
D
and [
C
 /(
C
D
)] will be close to (
C
 / 
D
). If 
Author Affiliations:
Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health andCommunity Medicine, and Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center,University of Washington, Seattle.
(REPRINTED) ARCH PEDIATR ADOLESC MED/VOL 163 (NO. 5), MAY 2009 WWW.ARCHPEDIATRICS.COM
©2009 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
 on April 7, 2012www.archpediatrics.comDownloaded from 
 
B
C
D
B
C
C
D
1
a
Yes
A
)
A
No
)
a
A
,
,
A
(
(
A
A
(
A
(
(
A
(
A
(
A
A
(
(
(
(
[
A
[
A
©2009 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
 on April 7, 2012www.archpediatrics.comDownloaded from 
 
 A
B
)/(
C
D
 A
C
B
D
2
(
 A
B
)/(
C
D
is(
B
 A
)/(
D
C
B
C
C
D
B
B
D
C
D
©2009 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
 on April 7, 2012www.archpediatrics.comDownloaded from 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->