ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Strategies of Modelling Incident Outcomes Using Cox Regression to Estimate the Population Attributable Risk.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applied comparison of stepwise Cox and Cox-LASSO regression in selecting determinants of joint replacement: insights from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Diagnostic and prognostic value of CD44v9 and TIM3 expression in CKOncology letters · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When the Cox model is applied, some recommendations about the choice of the time metric and the model's structure are often disregarded along with the proportionality of risk assumption. Moreover, most of the published studies fail to frame the real impact of a risk factor in the target population. Our aim was to show how modelling strategies affected Cox model assumptions. Furthermore, we showed how the Cox modelling strategies affected the population attributable risk (PAR). Our work is based on data collected in the North-West Province, one of the two PURE study centres in South Africa. The Cox model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of mortality for all causes in relation to smoking, alcohol use, physical inactivity, and hypertension. Firstly, we used a Cox model with time to event as the underlying time variable. Secondly, we used a Cox model with age to event as the underlying time variable. Finally, the second model was implemented with age classes and sex as strata variables. Mutually adjusted models were also investigated. A statistical test to the multiplicative interaction term the exposures and the log transformed time to event metric was used to assess the proportionality of risk assumption. The model's fitting was investigated by means of the Akaike Information Criteria (AIC). Models with age as the underlying time variable with age and sex as strata variables had enhanced validity of the risk proportionality assumption and better fitting. The PAR for a specific modifiable risk factor can be defined more accurately in mutually adjusted models allowing better public health decisions. This is not necessarily true when correlated modifiable risk factors are considered.
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.