Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34070675›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Foundational Statistical Principles in Medical Research: A Tutorial on Odds Ratios, Relative Risk, Absolute Risk, and Number Needed to Treat.

Thomas F Monaghan, Syed N Rahman, Christina W Agudelo, Alan J Wein, Jason M Lazar, Karel Everaert, Roger R Dmochowski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. [Interpretation of effect measures in clinical research: A practical guide for the clinician].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Real-world evidence: state-of-the-art and future perspectives.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Proper Calculation of Risk Ratios: How and Why.Perspectives on behavior science · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Who's Not Talking? Nonresponse Bias in Healthcare Employee Well-Being Surveys.Journal of healthcare management / American College of Healthcare Executives
    Article
  19. 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

7 authors.

Thomas F MonaghanDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5236-0783
Syed N RahmanDepartment of Urology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
Christina W AgudeloDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Alan J WeinDivision of Urology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Jason M LazarDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8548-7932
Karel EveraertDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7173-2039
Roger R DmochowskiDepartment of Urological Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine is predicated on the integration of best available research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values to inform care. In medical research, several distinct measures are commonly used to describe the associations between variables, and a sound understanding of these pervasive measures is foundational in the clinician's ability to interpret, synthesize, and apply available evidence from the medical literature. Accordingly, this article aims to provide an educational tutorial/topic primer on some of the most ubiquitous measures of association and risk quantification in medical research, including odds ratios, relative risk, absolute risk, and number needed to treat, using several real-world examples from the medical literature.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineHumansOdds RatioRiskbasicsbiostatisticsfundamentalsintroductionmethodologyoddsratiorelativeriskstatistics

Identifiers

PMID34070675
PMCPMC8198228

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.