Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30342488›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2018

Odds ratios from logistic, geometric, Poisson, and negative binomial regression models.

Christopher J Sroka, Haikady N Nagaraja

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Engaging social media users with attitudinal messages during health crisis communication.Lingua. International review of general linguistics. Revue internationale de linguistique generale · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. SARS-CoV-2 and work-related transmission: results of a prospective cohort of airport workers, 2020.Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Christopher J SrokaDepartment of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, MSC 3CQ, PO Box 30001, Las Cruces, NM, 88003-8001, USA. csroka@nmsu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3049-4684
Haikady N NagarajaDivision of Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, 1841 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210-1240, USA.

Funding

Project 4: Comprehension of Health Risks in More and Less Arousing Affe p240-275P50CA180908 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SHIELDS, PETER G., WEWERS, MARY ELLEN · 2013 to 2017
$18.9M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180908
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe odds ratio (OR) is used as an important metric of comparison of two or more groups in many biomedical applications when the data measure the presence or absence of an event or represent the frequency of its occurrence. In the latter case, researchers often dichotomize the count data into binary form and apply the well-known logistic regression technique to estimate the OR. In the process of dichotomizing the data, however, information is lost about the underlying counts which can reduce the precision of inferences on the OR.

methodsWe propose analyzing the count data directly using regression models with the log odds link function. With this approach, the parameter estimates in the model have the exact same interpretation as in a logistic regression of the dichotomized data, yielding comparable estimates of the OR. We prove analytically, using the Fisher information matrix, that our approach produces more precise estimates of the OR than logistic regression of the dichotomized data. We also show the gains in precision using simulation studies and real-world datasets. We focus on three related distributions for count data: geometric, Poisson, and negative binomial.

resultsIn simulation studies, confidence intervals for the OR were 56-65% as wide (geometric model), 75-79% as wide (Poisson model), and 61-69% as wide (negative binomial model) as the corresponding interval from a logistic regression produced by dichotomizing the data. When we analyzed existing datasets using our approach, we found that confidence intervals for the OR could be up to 64% shorter (36% as wide) compared to if the data had been dichotomized and analyzed using logistic regression.

conclusionsMore precise estimates of the OR can be obtained directly from the count data by using the log odds link function. This analytic approach is easy to implement in software packages that are capable of fitting generalized linear models or of maximizing user-defined likelihood functions.

Indexed as

Logistic ModelsModels, StatisticalPoisson DistributionRegression AnalysisAlgorithmsData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear ModelsOdds RatioReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareBinary dataConfidence intervalsCount dataFisher informationMaximum likelihood

Identifiers

PMID30342488
PMCPMC6195979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.