SynthesisOccupational and environmental medicine1994
Survey of methods and statistical models used in the analysis of occupational cohort studies.
Synthesis in Occupational and environmental medicine, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cohort studies in health sciences librarianship.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2002Article
- Reporting of occupational and environmental research: use and misuse of statistical and epidemiological methods.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2000Article
- Why and how to control for age in occupational epidemiology.Occupational and environmental medicine · 1997Review
- Methods in cohort studies.Occupational and environmental medicine · 1995Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis survey was conducted to determine the frequency with which different data analysis techniques are being used in occupational cohort studies. Of particular interest was the relative use of external and internal comparison groups, and the choice of multivariable model.
methodsOccupational cohort studies published in 1990-91 were located with Medline and Index Medicus, and the contents of several relevant journals were systematically reviewed. Each study was categorised by the methods of external or internal comparisons performed.
resultsOf 200 occupational cohort studies identified, 104 (52%) conducted only external comparisons, 46 (23%) conducted only internal, and 50 (25%) presented both. Of those that used an external referent population, about two thirds used a national standard. 40 of the studies that performed internal comparisons fitted multivariable models, with use divided about equally between proportional hazards regression, Poisson regression, and logistic regression. DISCUSSION: The finding that logistic regression is used quite commonly, even though it does not directly model time dependent data of the type frequently encountered in occupational cohort studies, was suprising. The reasons why investigators choose from among the available statistical and modelling techniques are likely to include familiarity, ease of use, restrictions in study population characteristics, especially study size, and others. Authors should be encouraged to be more explicit about the statistical methods used in the analysis of occupational cohort studies, as well as whether important assumptions about their data have been evaluated.
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.