Montreuil Bernard, Bendavid Yves, Brophy James
Department of Surgery, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Université de Montréal, Que.
Can J Surg. 2005 Oct;48(5):400-8.
In clinical studies, the relative likelihood of an event occurring between 2 groups is often expressed as the risk ratio (RR) or the odds ratio (OR). The RR is an intuitive parameter that is relatively easy to interpret. Quantitative interpretation of an OR is much more difficult and is often incorrectly equated to that of an RR. The problem is that OR may differ substantially from RR, especially when the outcome of interest is common in the study population. This article explains and clarifies controversial issues surrounding the use and interpretation of the OR. Theoretical concepts relating to ORs are illustrated by examples from the surgical literature. By reviewing articles from 5 surgical journals over a 5-year period, we show that the OR is often presented and misinterpreted as equivalent to the RR. When the discrepancy is large, using OR uncritically as an estimate of RR will strongly bias inferences about treatment effect or cause of disease by amplifying the apparent strength of an association between an exposure and an outcome.
在临床研究中,两组之间事件发生的相对可能性通常用风险比(RR)或比值比(OR)来表示。RR是一个直观的参数,相对容易解释。OR的定量解释要困难得多,而且常常被错误地等同于RR的解释。问题在于,OR可能与RR有很大差异,尤其是当研究人群中感兴趣的结局很常见时。本文解释并阐明了围绕OR的使用和解释的争议性问题。通过外科文献中的实例说明了与OR相关的理论概念。通过回顾5种外科杂志在5年期间发表的文章,我们发现OR经常被呈现并被错误地解释为等同于RR。当差异很大时,不加批判地将OR用作RR的估计值,会通过放大暴露与结局之间关联的明显强度,严重歪曲关于治疗效果或疾病病因的推断。