Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8000487›Full record

SynthesisOccupational and environmental medicine1994

Survey of methods and statistical models used in the analysis of occupational cohort studies.

P W Callas, H Pastides, D W Hosmer

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Cohort studies in health sciences librarianship.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2002
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Why and how to control for age in occupational epidemiology.Occupational and environmental medicine · 1997
    Review
  5. Methods in cohort studies.Occupational and environmental medicine · 1995
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

P W CallasDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 01003-0430.
H Pastides
D W Hosmer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Cohort StudiesData Interpretation, StatisticalModels, StatisticalHumansMorbidityOccupational DiseasesOccupational MedicinePeriodicals as TopicReference Values

Identifiers

PMID8000487
PMCPMC1128071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.