Cargando…
Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies
Odds ratios (ORs) are widely used in scientific research to demonstrate associations between outcome variables and covariates (risk factors) of interest and are often described in language suitable for risks or probabilities, but odds and probabilities are related, not equivalent. In situations wher...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399983/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22436842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/oby.2012.71 |
_version_ | 1782238448433758208 |
---|---|
author | Tajeu, Gabriel Sen, Bisakha Allison, David B. Menachemi, Nir |
author_facet | Tajeu, Gabriel Sen, Bisakha Allison, David B. Menachemi, Nir |
author_sort | Tajeu, Gabriel |
collection | PubMed |
description | Odds ratios (ORs) are widely used in scientific research to demonstrate associations between outcome variables and covariates (risk factors) of interest and are often described in language suitable for risks or probabilities, but odds and probabilities are related, not equivalent. In situations where the outcome is not rare (e.g., obesity), ORs no longer approximate the relative risk ratio and may be misinterpreted. Our study examines the extent of misinterpretation of ORs in Obesity and International Journal of Obesity. We reviewed all 2010 issues of these journals to identify all articles that presented ORs. Included articles were then primarily reviewed for correct presentation and interpretation of ORs; and secondarily reviewed for article characteristics that may have been associated with how ORs are presented and interpreted. Of the 855 articles examined, 62 (7.3%) presented ORs. ORs were presented incorrectly in 23.2% of these articles. Clinical articles were more likely to present ORs correctly than social science or basic science articles. Studies with outcome variables that had higher relative prevalence were less likely to present ORs correctly. Overall, almost a quarter of the studies presenting ORs in two leading journals on obesity misinterpreted them. Furthermore, even when researchers present ORs correctly, the lay media may misinterpret them as relative risk ratios. Therefore, we suggest that when the magnitude of associations is of interest, researchers should carefully and accurately present interpretable measures of association -- including risk ratios and risk differences -- to minimize confusion and misrepresentation of research results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3399983 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-33999832013-02-01 Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies Tajeu, Gabriel Sen, Bisakha Allison, David B. Menachemi, Nir Obesity (Silver Spring) Article Odds ratios (ORs) are widely used in scientific research to demonstrate associations between outcome variables and covariates (risk factors) of interest and are often described in language suitable for risks or probabilities, but odds and probabilities are related, not equivalent. In situations where the outcome is not rare (e.g., obesity), ORs no longer approximate the relative risk ratio and may be misinterpreted. Our study examines the extent of misinterpretation of ORs in Obesity and International Journal of Obesity. We reviewed all 2010 issues of these journals to identify all articles that presented ORs. Included articles were then primarily reviewed for correct presentation and interpretation of ORs; and secondarily reviewed for article characteristics that may have been associated with how ORs are presented and interpreted. Of the 855 articles examined, 62 (7.3%) presented ORs. ORs were presented incorrectly in 23.2% of these articles. Clinical articles were more likely to present ORs correctly than social science or basic science articles. Studies with outcome variables that had higher relative prevalence were less likely to present ORs correctly. Overall, almost a quarter of the studies presenting ORs in two leading journals on obesity misinterpreted them. Furthermore, even when researchers present ORs correctly, the lay media may misinterpret them as relative risk ratios. Therefore, we suggest that when the magnitude of associations is of interest, researchers should carefully and accurately present interpretable measures of association -- including risk ratios and risk differences -- to minimize confusion and misrepresentation of research results. 2012-03-22 2012-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3399983/ /pubmed/22436842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/oby.2012.71 Text en http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use:http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms |
spellingShingle | Article Tajeu, Gabriel Sen, Bisakha Allison, David B. Menachemi, Nir Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title | Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title_full | Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title_fullStr | Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title_short | Misuse of Odds Ratios in Obesity Literature: An Empirical Analysis of Published Studies |
title_sort | misuse of odds ratios in obesity literature: an empirical analysis of published studies |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399983/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22436842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/oby.2012.71 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tajeugabriel misuseofoddsratiosinobesityliteratureanempiricalanalysisofpublishedstudies AT senbisakha misuseofoddsratiosinobesityliteratureanempiricalanalysisofpublishedstudies AT allisondavidb misuseofoddsratiosinobesityliteratureanempiricalanalysisofpublishedstudies AT menacheminir misuseofoddsratiosinobesityliteratureanempiricalanalysisofpublishedstudies |