Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23002407›Full record

ArticleThe open epidemiology journal2012

At Odds: Concerns Raised by Using Odds Ratios for Continuous or Common Dichotomous Outcomes in Research on Physical Activity and Obesity.

Gina S Lovasi, Lindsay J Underhill, Darby Jack, Catherine Richards, Christopher Weiss, Andrew Rundle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The open epidemiology journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Modifiable Risk Factors and Hearing Loss: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2020.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Differences in Breastfeeding Initiation and Duration by Migration History in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.Breastfeeding medicine : the official journal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Neonatal systemic inflammation and the risk of low scores on measures of reading and mathematics achievement at age 10 years among children born extremely preterm.International journal of developmental neuroscience : the official journal of the International Society for Developmental Neuroscience · 2018
    Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Mammographic Appearances in Mongolia: Causal Factors for Varying DensitiesAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2017
    Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gina S LovasiColumbia University, Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, 722 W 168th St, Room 804, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Lindsay J Underhill
Darby Jack
Catherine Richards
Christopher Weiss
Andrew Rundle

Funding

Obesity, Physical Activity and Built Space in New York CityR01ES014229 · NIEHS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RUNDLE, ANDREW G · 2005 to 2009
$1.9M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES014229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeResearch on obesity and the built environment has often featured logistic regression and the corresponding parameter, the odds ratio. Use of odds ratios for common outcomes such obesity may unnecessarily hinder the validity, interpretation, and communication of research findings.

methodsWe identified three key issues raised by the use of odds ratios, illustrating them with data on walkability and body mass index from a study of 13,102 New York City residents.

resultsFirst, dichotomization of continuous measures such as body mass index discards theoretically relevant information, reduces statistical power, and amplifies measurement error. Second, odds ratios are systematically higher (further from the null) than prevalence ratios; this inflation is trivial for rare outcomes, but substantial for common outcomes like obesity. Third, odds ratios can lead to incorrect conclusions during tests of interactions. The odds ratio in a particular subgroup might higher simply because the outcome is more common (and the odds ratio inflated) compared with other subgroups.

conclusionOur recommendations are to take full advantage of continuous outcome data when feasible and to use prevalence ratios in place of odds ratios for common dichotomous outcomes. When odds ratios must be used, authors should document outcome prevalence across exposure groups.

Identifiers

PMID23002407
PMCPMC3446823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.