+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Relative risk

  1. #1
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Relative risk




    The following comes from "Applied Medical Statistics Using SAS" 114-115. In it:

    p1 occurs when a disease is present when a risk factor is present
    p2 occurs when a disease is present when a risk factor is not present
    p3 occurs when disease is absent and risk factor is present
    p4 occurs when diesase is absent and risk factor is absent.

    They define relative risk as (p1/(p2+p4))/(p2/(p1+p3))

    It seems to me that it should be (p1/(p1+p3))/(p2/(p2+p4))

    Which is what I found in other sources. Anyone know?
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

  2. #2
    Cookie Scientist
    Points: 13,431, Level: 75
    Level completed: 46%, Points required for next Level: 219
    Jake's Avatar
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,293
    Thanks
    66
    Thanked 584 Times in 438 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    Quote Originally Posted by noetsi View Post
    The following comes from "Applied Medical Statistics Using SAS" 114-115. In it:

    p1 occurs when a disease is present when a risk factor is present
    p2 occurs when a disease is present when a risk factor is not present
    p3 occurs when disease is absent and risk factor is present
    p4 occurs when diesase is absent and risk factor is absent.

    They define relative risk as (p1/(p2+p4))/(p2/(p1+p3))

    It seems to me that it should be (p1/(p1+p3))/(p2/(p2+p4))

    Which is what I found in other sources. Anyone know?
    I believe you are right and the text is mistaken. It doesn't make sense to have completely different terms in the numerators and denominators of the proportions.
    “In God we trust. All others must bring data.”
    ~W. Edwards Deming

  3. #3
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    I found several links that agree with my understanding. I am hoping that someone might actually have the book I am citing and explain that I am misunderstanding the authors But it looks like a mistake in the text. One that really baffled me at first.
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

  4. #4
    Cookie Scientist
    Points: 13,431, Level: 75
    Level completed: 46%, Points required for next Level: 219
    Jake's Avatar
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,293
    Thanks
    66
    Thanked 584 Times in 438 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    It looks like a simple typo, an easy mistake to make when writing an expression involving a lot of similar terms like that.
    “In God we trust. All others must bring data.”
    ~W. Edwards Deming

  5. #5
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    yeah but given that it is presumably being read by medical researchers (and given the mistakes that have been identified in existing medical research) it is a bit concerning.

    "Yes several studies have clearly shown cyanide is positively associated with lower cancer rates"

    Well that could be the case....
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

  6. #6
    Points: 19, Level: 1
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 31

    Posts
    5
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    that is a great topic ....thank uuuuuuuuuuuuu

  7. #7
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 38,289, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Location
    Not Ames, IA
    Posts
    6,992
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,185 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    Don't forget those people that like to hang out in caves in colorado that have low levels of radioactivity.

    Yeah, the respective p should be in the denominator along with its counterpart. I always remember incidence/prevalence given knowledge of temporality are the part / part + counter part, then odds equal part / counterpart.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  8. #8
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    Does anyone know how I could send the scan here? I wanted to let others see if I am simply misreading what they are saying or there is reall a mistake in the text.
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

  9. #9
    Cookie Scientist
    Points: 13,431, Level: 75
    Level completed: 46%, Points required for next Level: 219
    Jake's Avatar
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,293
    Thanks
    66
    Thanked 584 Times in 438 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    Upload the scanned image to a site like imgur.com or imageshack.com, and then share that link here, either in IMG tags or by just pasting the URL.
    “In God we trust. All others must bring data.”
    ~W. Edwards Deming

  10. #10
    Devorador de queso
    Points: 95,540, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Awards:
    Posting AwardCommunity AwardDiscussion EnderFrequent Poster
    Dason's Avatar
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    12,930
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 2,629 Times in 2,245 Posts

    Re: Relative risk

    You can also attach it to the post directly.
    I don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me very sad.

  11. #11
    Points: 3,730, Level: 38
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 70

    Posts
    155
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 30 Times in 29 Posts

    Re: Relative risk


    Perhaps they meant to say RR = P1(P2+P4)/P2(P1+P3), and just divided by accident.

+ Reply to Thread

           




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts






Advertise on Talk Stats