Author
Michael Hills
Bio: Michael Hills is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Statistical epidemiology & Statistical model. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 6 publications receiving 1659 citations.
Papers
More filters
•
05 Aug 1993
TL;DR: This self-contained account of the statistical basis of epidemiology has been written specifically for those with a basic training in biology, therefore no previous knowledge is assumed and the mathematics is deliberately kept at a manageable level.
Abstract: Statistical models in epidemiology , Statistical models in epidemiology , کتابخانه مرکزی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران
1,527 citations
•
1 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
Leiden University Medical Center1, University Hospital of Lausanne2, University of Oxford3, Cochrane Collaboration4, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio5, University of London6, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill7, University of Pittsburgh8, University of Cape Town9, University of Bern10
TL;DR: The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers.
3,567 citations
••
TL;DR: Cox or Poisson regression with robust variance and log-binomial regression provide correct estimates and are a better alternative for the analysis of cross-sectional studies with binary outcomes than logistic regression, since the prevalence ratio is more interpretable and easier to communicate to non-specialists than the odds ratio.
Abstract: Cross-sectional studies with binary outcomes analyzed by logistic regression are frequent in the epidemiological literature. However, the odds ratio can importantly overestimate the prevalence ratio, the measure of choice in these studies. Also, controlling for confounding is not equivalent for the two measures. In this paper we explore alternatives for modeling data of such studies with techniques that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. We compared Cox regression with constant time at risk, Poisson regression and log-binomial regression against the standard Mantel-Haenszel estimators. Models with robust variance estimators in Cox and Poisson regressions and variance corrected by the scale parameter in Poisson regression were also evaluated. Three outcomes, from a cross-sectional study carried out in Pelotas, Brazil, with different levels of prevalence were explored: weight-for-age deficit (4%), asthma (31%) and mother in a paid job (52%). Unadjusted Cox/Poisson regression and Poisson regression with scale parameter adjusted by deviance performed worst in terms of interval estimates. Poisson regression with scale parameter adjusted by χ2 showed variable performance depending on the outcome prevalence. Cox/Poisson regression with robust variance, and log-binomial regression performed equally well when the model was correctly specified. Cox or Poisson regression with robust variance and log-binomial regression provide correct estimates and are a better alternative for the analysis of cross-sectional studies with binary outcomes than logistic regression, since the prevalence ratio is more interpretable and easier to communicate to non-specialists than the odds ratio. However, precautions are needed to avoid estimation problems in specific situations.
3,455 citations
••
TL;DR: Causal diagrams can provide a starting point for identifying variables that must be measured and controlled to obtain unconfounded effect estimates and provide a method for critical evaluation of traditional epidemiologic criteria for confounding.
Abstract: Causal diagrams have a long history of informal use and, more recently, have undergone formal development for applications in expert systems and robotics. We provide an introduction to these developments and their use in epidemiologic research. Causal diagrams can provide a starting point for identifying variables that must be measured and controlled to obtain unconfounded effect estimates. They also provide a method for critical evaluation of traditional epidemiologic criteria for confounding. In particular, they reveal certain heretofore unnoticed shortcomings of those criteria when used in considering multiple potential confounders. We show how to modify the traditional criteria to correct those shortcomings.
2,983 citations
•
[...]
2,246 citations