Cargando…
A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey
BACKGROUND: The practice of dichotomizing a continuous outcome variable does not make use of within-category information. That means the loss of information. This study compared two approaches in the modelling of the association between sociodemographic and smoking with obesity in adult women in Ira...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2613917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19032774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-78 |
_version_ | 1782163211429085184 |
---|---|
author | Bakhshi, Enayatollah Eshraghian, Mohammad R Mohammad, Kazem Seifi, Behjat |
author_facet | Bakhshi, Enayatollah Eshraghian, Mohammad R Mohammad, Kazem Seifi, Behjat |
author_sort | Bakhshi, Enayatollah |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The practice of dichotomizing a continuous outcome variable does not make use of within-category information. That means the loss of information. This study compared two approaches in the modelling of the association between sociodemographic and smoking with obesity in adult women in Iran. METHODS: We conducted a comparative study between two methods via an illustrative example, using data from the "National Health Survey in Iran (NHSI)" database. It included 14176 women aged 20–69 years. At first, body mass index(BMI) was treated as a continuous variable, OR(s )and 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated using the "without dichotomizing" method. Then subjects were classified into obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2)) and nonobese (BMI < 30 kg/m(2)) and logistic regression model was used to estimate OR(s )and 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: The odds ratio estimates changed only slightly over the two methods. But the "without dichotomizing" method provided shorter confidence intervals on the odds ratio parameters than dichotomizing method. All relative confidence interval lengths were greater than 1.15. CONCLUSION: If responses are continuous then the "without dichotomizing" method is certainly more useful than the "dichotomizing" method and leads to more precise estimation of odds ratios. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2613917 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-26139172009-01-12 A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey Bakhshi, Enayatollah Eshraghian, Mohammad R Mohammad, Kazem Seifi, Behjat BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The practice of dichotomizing a continuous outcome variable does not make use of within-category information. That means the loss of information. This study compared two approaches in the modelling of the association between sociodemographic and smoking with obesity in adult women in Iran. METHODS: We conducted a comparative study between two methods via an illustrative example, using data from the "National Health Survey in Iran (NHSI)" database. It included 14176 women aged 20–69 years. At first, body mass index(BMI) was treated as a continuous variable, OR(s )and 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated using the "without dichotomizing" method. Then subjects were classified into obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2)) and nonobese (BMI < 30 kg/m(2)) and logistic regression model was used to estimate OR(s )and 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: The odds ratio estimates changed only slightly over the two methods. But the "without dichotomizing" method provided shorter confidence intervals on the odds ratio parameters than dichotomizing method. All relative confidence interval lengths were greater than 1.15. CONCLUSION: If responses are continuous then the "without dichotomizing" method is certainly more useful than the "dichotomizing" method and leads to more precise estimation of odds ratios. BioMed Central 2008-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC2613917/ /pubmed/19032774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-78 Text en Copyright © 2008 Bakhshi et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Bakhshi, Enayatollah Eshraghian, Mohammad R Mohammad, Kazem Seifi, Behjat A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title | A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title_full | A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title_fullStr | A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title_short | A comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: Results from the National Health Survey |
title_sort | comparison of two methods for estimating odds ratios: results from the national health survey |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2613917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19032774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-78 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bakhshienayatollah acomparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT eshraghianmohammadr acomparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT mohammadkazem acomparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT seifibehjat acomparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT bakhshienayatollah comparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT eshraghianmohammadr comparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT mohammadkazem comparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey AT seifibehjat comparisonoftwomethodsforestimatingoddsratiosresultsfromthenationalhealthsurvey |