Suppr超能文献

计算绝对骨折风险而非相对骨折风险的重要性。

The importance of calculating absolute rather than relative fracture risk.

作者信息

Tucker Graeme, Metcalfe Andrew, Pearce Charles, Need Allan G, Dick Ian M, Prince Richard L, Nordin B E Christopher

机构信息

Health Statistics Unit, Department of Health, Government of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia.

出版信息

Bone. 2007 Dec;41(6):937-41. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2007.07.015. Epub 2007 Aug 3.

Abstract

The relation between fracture risk and bone mineral density (BMD) is commonly expressed as a multiplicative factor which is said to represent the increase in risk for each standard deviation fall in BMD. This practice assumes that risk increases multiplicatively with each unit fall in bone density, which is not correct. Although odds increase multiplicatively, absolute risk, which lies between 0 and 1, cannot do so though it can be derived from odds by the term Odds/(1+Odds). This concept is illustrated in a prospective study of 1098 women over age 69 followed for 6 years in a calcium trial in which hip BMD was measured in the second year. 304 Women (27.6%) had prevalent fractures and 198 (18.1%) incident fractures with a significant association between them (P 0.005). Age-adjusted hip BMD and T-score were significantly lower in those with prevalent fractures than in those without (P 0.003) and significantly lower in those with incident fractures than in those without (P 0.001). When the data were analysed by univariate logistic regression, the fracture odds at zero T-score were 0.130 and the rise in odds for each unit fall in hip T-score was 1.55. When these odds were converted to risks, there was a progressive divergence between odds and risk at T-scores below zero. Multiple logistic regression yielded significant odds ratios of 1.47 for each 5-year increase in age, 1.47 for prevalent fracture and 1.49 for each unit fall in hip T-score. Calcium therapy was not significant. Poisson regression, logistic regression and Cox's proportional hazards yielded very similar outcomes when converted into absolute risks. A nomogram was constructed to enable clinicians to estimate the approximate 6-year fracture risk from hip T-score, age and prevalent fracture which can probably be applied (with appropriate correction) to men as well as to women. We conclude that multiplicative factors can be applied to odds but not to risk and that multipliers of risk tend to overstate the effect of continuous variables, such as age and T-score, particularly towards the end of their ranges.

摘要

骨折风险与骨密度(BMD)之间的关系通常用一个乘数因子来表示,据说该因子代表骨密度每下降一个标准差时风险的增加。这种做法假定风险随着骨密度每下降一个单位而成倍增加,但这是不正确的。虽然比值成倍增加,但介于0和1之间的绝对风险却不能如此,不过它可以通过“比值/(1 + 比值)”从比值中推导出来。这一概念在一项针对1098名69岁以上女性的前瞻性研究中得到了说明,这些女性在一项钙试验中被随访了6年,在第二年测量了髋部骨密度。304名女性(27.6%)有既往骨折,198名(18.1%)有新发骨折,两者之间存在显著关联(P < 0.005)。年龄调整后的髋部骨密度和T值在有既往骨折的患者中显著低于无既往骨折的患者(P < 0.003),在有新发骨折的患者中显著低于无新发骨折的患者(P < 0.001)。当通过单因素逻辑回归分析数据时,T值为零时的骨折比值为0.130,髋部T值每下降一个单位,比值的上升幅度为1.55。当这些比值转换为风险时,在T值低于零时,比值和风险之间出现了逐渐的差异。多因素逻辑回归得出,年龄每增加5岁的显著比值比为1.47,既往骨折的比值比为1.47,髋部T值每下降一个单位的比值比为1.49。钙治疗无显著意义。当转换为绝对风险时,泊松回归、逻辑回归和考克斯比例风险模型得出的结果非常相似。构建了一个列线图,使临床医生能够根据髋部T值、年龄和既往骨折情况估计大约6年的骨折风险,该列线图可能(经过适当校正)适用于男性和女性。我们得出结论,乘数因子可应用于比值,但不适用于风险,而且风险乘数往往会高估年龄和T值等连续变量的影响,尤其是在这些变量范围的末端。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验