Cargando…

Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies

BACKGROUND: In case-cohort studies with binary outcomes, ordinary logistic regression analyses have been widely used because of their computational simplicity. However, the resultant odds ratio estimates cannot be interpreted as relative risk measures unless the event rate is low. The risk ratio and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Noma, Hisashi, Misumi, Munechika, Tanaka, Shiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Japan Epidemiological Association 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10483099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35753802
http://dx.doi.org/10.2188/jea.JE20210509
_version_ 1785102306010726400
author Noma, Hisashi
Misumi, Munechika
Tanaka, Shiro
author_facet Noma, Hisashi
Misumi, Munechika
Tanaka, Shiro
author_sort Noma, Hisashi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In case-cohort studies with binary outcomes, ordinary logistic regression analyses have been widely used because of their computational simplicity. However, the resultant odds ratio estimates cannot be interpreted as relative risk measures unless the event rate is low. The risk ratio and risk difference are more favorable outcome measures that are directly interpreted as effect measures without the rare disease assumption. METHODS: We provide pseudo-Poisson and pseudo-normal linear regression methods for estimating risk ratios and risk differences in analyses of case-cohort studies. These multivariate regression models are fitted by weighting the inverses of sampling probabilities. Also, the precisions of the risk ratio and risk difference estimators can be improved using auxiliary variable information, specifically by adapting the calibrated or estimated weights, which are readily measured on all samples from the whole cohort. Finally, we provide computational code in R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) that can easily perform these methods. RESULTS: Through numerical analyses of artificially simulated data and the National Wilms Tumor Study data, accurate risk ratio and risk difference estimates were obtained using the pseudo-Poisson and pseudo-normal linear regression methods. Also, using the auxiliary variable information from the whole cohort, precisions of these estimators were markedly improved. CONCLUSION: The ordinary logistic regression analyses may provide uninterpretable effect measure estimates, and the risk ratio and risk difference estimation methods are effective alternative approaches for case-cohort studies. These methods are especially recommended under situations in which the event rate is not low.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10483099
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Japan Epidemiological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104830992023-10-05 Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies Noma, Hisashi Misumi, Munechika Tanaka, Shiro J Epidemiol Original Article BACKGROUND: In case-cohort studies with binary outcomes, ordinary logistic regression analyses have been widely used because of their computational simplicity. However, the resultant odds ratio estimates cannot be interpreted as relative risk measures unless the event rate is low. The risk ratio and risk difference are more favorable outcome measures that are directly interpreted as effect measures without the rare disease assumption. METHODS: We provide pseudo-Poisson and pseudo-normal linear regression methods for estimating risk ratios and risk differences in analyses of case-cohort studies. These multivariate regression models are fitted by weighting the inverses of sampling probabilities. Also, the precisions of the risk ratio and risk difference estimators can be improved using auxiliary variable information, specifically by adapting the calibrated or estimated weights, which are readily measured on all samples from the whole cohort. Finally, we provide computational code in R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) that can easily perform these methods. RESULTS: Through numerical analyses of artificially simulated data and the National Wilms Tumor Study data, accurate risk ratio and risk difference estimates were obtained using the pseudo-Poisson and pseudo-normal linear regression methods. Also, using the auxiliary variable information from the whole cohort, precisions of these estimators were markedly improved. CONCLUSION: The ordinary logistic regression analyses may provide uninterpretable effect measure estimates, and the risk ratio and risk difference estimation methods are effective alternative approaches for case-cohort studies. These methods are especially recommended under situations in which the event rate is not low. Japan Epidemiological Association 2023-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10483099/ /pubmed/35753802 http://dx.doi.org/10.2188/jea.JE20210509 Text en © 2022 Hisashi Noma et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Noma, Hisashi
Misumi, Munechika
Tanaka, Shiro
Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title_full Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title_fullStr Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title_full_unstemmed Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title_short Risk Ratio and Risk Difference Estimation in Case-cohort Studies
title_sort risk ratio and risk difference estimation in case-cohort studies
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10483099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35753802
http://dx.doi.org/10.2188/jea.JE20210509
work_keys_str_mv AT nomahisashi riskratioandriskdifferenceestimationincasecohortstudies
AT misumimunechika riskratioandriskdifferenceestimationincasecohortstudies
AT tanakashiro riskratioandriskdifferenceestimationincasecohortstudies