ArticleSSM - population health2017
The tyranny of the averages and the indiscriminate use of risk factors in public health: The case of coronary heart disease.
Article in SSM - population health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
46 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of heterogeneous Head Start treatment effects on cognitive and social-emotional outcomes.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Intersectional inequalities in COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality: A nationwide MAIHDA study of Swedish adults across four pandemic waves (2020-2022).SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Integrating social and cardiometabolic risk factors in predicting cardiometabolic multimorbidity: a Bayesian model development and internal validation in Swedish middle-aged adults.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From Averages to Heterogeneity: A Plain-Language Guide to MAIHDA in Epidemiology.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Review
- Social determinants of intersectional inequalities in multimorbidity and its burden in China: a multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA).International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Intersectional inequalities in social-emotional problems among three-year-old children in Sweden: a population-based study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Socio-geographical disparities in cardiometabolic multimorbidity in Sweden: an Intersectional Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (I-MAIHDA).International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Geographic and socioeconomic differences in potentially inappropriate medication among older adults - applying a simplified analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (AIHDA) for basic comparisons of healthcare quality.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- What can we learn from an intersectionality-informed description of study participants? Results from the German National Cohort.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Variance partition that eludes intuition.SSM - population health · 2025Article
- Bridging ancient wisdom and modern technology: an AI and multi-omics framework for three causes tailored treatment in personalized medicine.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Review
- Trust in healthcare and perceived discrimination in Sweden: a fixed effects analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Depression at the intersection of race/ethnicity, sex/gender, and sexual orientation in a nationally representative sample of US adults: a design-weighted intersectional MAIHDA.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Onset of Type 2 diabetes in adults aged 50 and older in Europe: an intersectional multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
- Perceived discrimination and refraining from seeking physician's care in Sweden: an intersectional analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (AIHDA).International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Article
- Intersectional socioeconomic disparities in continuous smoking through pregnancy among pre-pregnant smokers in Sweden between 2006 and 2016.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Mapping socio-geographical disparities in the occurrence of teenage maternity in Colombia using multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA).International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern medicine is overwhelmed by a plethora of both established risk factors and novel biomarkers for diseases. The majority of this information is expressed by probabilistic measures of association such as the odds ratio (OR) obtained by calculating differences in average "risk" between exposed and unexposed groups. However, recent research demonstrates that even ORs of considerable magnitude are insufficient for assessing the ability of risk factors or biomarkers to distinguish the individuals who will develop the disease from those who will not. In regards to coronary heart disease (CHD), we already know that novel biomarkers add very little to the discriminatory accuracy (DA) of traditional risk factors. However, the value added by traditional risk factors alongside simple demographic variables such as age and sex has been the subject of less discussion. Moreover, in public health, we use the OR to calculate the population attributable fraction (PAF), although this measure fails to consider the DA of the risk factor it represents. Therefore, focusing on CHD and applying measures of DA, we re-examine the role of individual demographic characteristics, risk factors, novel biomarkers and PAFs in public health and epidemiology. In so doing, we also raise a more general criticism of the traditional risk factors' epidemiology. We investigated a cohort of 6103 men and women who participated in the baseline (1991-1996) of the Malmö Diet and Cancer study and were followed for 18 years. We found that neither traditional risk factors nor biomarkers substantially improved the DA obtained by models considering only age and sex. We concluded that the PAF measure provided insufficient information for the planning of preventive strategies in the population. We need a better understanding of the individual heterogeneity around the averages and, thereby, a fundamental change in the way we interpret risk factors in public health and epidemiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.