Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many epidemiologic studies report the odds ratio as a measure of association for cross-sectional studies with common outcomes. In such cases, the prevalence ratios may not be inferred from the estimated odds ratios. This paper overvi...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2008-12-01
|
Series: | BMC Medical Research Methodology |
Online Access: | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/8/80 |
id |
doaj-c444a21875504cbba7648b1791f06038 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-c444a21875504cbba7648b1791f060382020-11-24T21:47:08ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882008-12-01818010.1186/1471-2288-8-80Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological dataMoncayo Ana-Luciado Carmo MariaBarreto Maurício LCunha SérgioOliveira Nelson FFiaccone Rosemeire LSantos CarlosRodrigues Laura CCooper Philip JAmorim Leila D<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many epidemiologic studies report the odds ratio as a measure of association for cross-sectional studies with common outcomes. In such cases, the prevalence ratios may not be inferred from the estimated odds ratios. This paper overviews the most commonly used procedures to obtain adjusted prevalence ratios and extends the discussion to the analysis of clustered cross-sectional studies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Prevalence ratios(PR) were estimated using logistic models with random effects. Their 95% confidence intervals were obtained using delta method and clustered bootstrap. The performance of these approaches was evaluated through simulation studies. Using data from two studies with health-related outcomes in children, we discuss the interpretation of the measures of association and their implications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results from data analysis highlighted major differences between estimated OR and PR. Results from simulation studies indicate an improved performance of delta method compared to bootstrap when there are small number of clusters.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We recommend the use of logistic model with random effects for analysis of clustered data. The choice of method to estimate confidence intervals for PR (delta or bootstrap method) should be based on study design.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/8/80 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Moncayo Ana-Lucia do Carmo Maria Barreto Maurício L Cunha Sérgio Oliveira Nelson F Fiaccone Rosemeire L Santos Carlos Rodrigues Laura C Cooper Philip J Amorim Leila D |
spellingShingle |
Moncayo Ana-Lucia do Carmo Maria Barreto Maurício L Cunha Sérgio Oliveira Nelson F Fiaccone Rosemeire L Santos Carlos Rodrigues Laura C Cooper Philip J Amorim Leila D Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data BMC Medical Research Methodology |
author_facet |
Moncayo Ana-Lucia do Carmo Maria Barreto Maurício L Cunha Sérgio Oliveira Nelson F Fiaccone Rosemeire L Santos Carlos Rodrigues Laura C Cooper Philip J Amorim Leila D |
author_sort |
Moncayo Ana-Lucia |
title |
Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
title_short |
Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
title_full |
Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
title_fullStr |
Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
title_full_unstemmed |
Estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
title_sort |
estimating adjusted prevalence ratio in clustered cross-sectional epidemiological data |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Medical Research Methodology |
issn |
1471-2288 |
publishDate |
2008-12-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many epidemiologic studies report the odds ratio as a measure of association for cross-sectional studies with common outcomes. In such cases, the prevalence ratios may not be inferred from the estimated odds ratios. This paper overviews the most commonly used procedures to obtain adjusted prevalence ratios and extends the discussion to the analysis of clustered cross-sectional studies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Prevalence ratios(PR) were estimated using logistic models with random effects. Their 95% confidence intervals were obtained using delta method and clustered bootstrap. The performance of these approaches was evaluated through simulation studies. Using data from two studies with health-related outcomes in children, we discuss the interpretation of the measures of association and their implications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results from data analysis highlighted major differences between estimated OR and PR. Results from simulation studies indicate an improved performance of delta method compared to bootstrap when there are small number of clusters.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We recommend the use of logistic model with random effects for analysis of clustered data. The choice of method to estimate confidence intervals for PR (delta or bootstrap method) should be based on study design.</p> |
url |
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/8/80 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT moncayoanalucia estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT docarmomaria estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT barretomauriciol estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT cunhasergio estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT oliveiranelsonf estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT fiacconerosemeirel estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT santoscarlos estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT rodrigueslaurac estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT cooperphilipj estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata AT amorimleilad estimatingadjustedprevalenceratioinclusteredcrosssectionalepidemiologicaldata |
_version_ |
1725899114859724800 |