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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tajeu, Gabriel, Sen, Bisakha, Allison, David B., Menachemi, Nir
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