Sobh Mohamad, Cleophas Ton J, Hadj-Chaib Amel, Zwinderman Aeilko H
European College of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Lyon France.
Am J Ther. 2008 Jan-Feb;15(1):44-52. doi: 10.1097/MJT.0b013e3180ed80bf.
Odds ratios (ORs), unlike chi2 tests, provide direct insight into the strength of the relationship between treatment modalities and treatment effects. Multiple regression models can reduce the data spread due to certain patient characteristics and thus improve the precision of the treatment comparison. Despite these advantages, the use of these methods in clinical trials is relatively uncommon. Our objectives were (1) to emphasize the great potential of ORs and multiple regression models as a basis of modern methods; (2) to illustrate their ease of use; and (3) to familiarize nonmathematical readers with these important methods. Advantages of ORs are multiple. (1) They describe the probability that people with a certain treatment will have an event, versus those without the treatment, and are therefore a welcome alternative to the widely used chi2 tests for analyzing binary data in clinical trials. (2) statistical software of ORs is widely available. (3) Computations using risk ratios (RRs) are less sensitive than those using ORs. (4) ORs are the basis for modern methods such as meta-analyses, propensity scores, logistic regression, and Cox regression. For analysis, logarithms of the ORs have to be used; results are obtained by calculating antilogarithms. A limitation of the ORs is that they present relative benefits but not absolute benefits. ORs, despite a fairly complex mathematical background, are easy to use, even for nonmathematicians. Both linear and logistic regression models can be adequately applied for the purpose of improving precision of parameter estimates such as treatment effects. We caution that, although application of these models is very easy with computer programs widely available, the fit of the regression models should always be carefully checked, and the covariate selection should be carefully considered and sparse. We do hope that this article will stimulate clinical investigators to use ORs and multiple regression models more often.
与卡方检验不同,优势比(OR)能直接洞察治疗方式与治疗效果之间关系的强度。多元回归模型可以减少因某些患者特征导致的数据离散度,从而提高治疗比较的精度。尽管有这些优点,但这些方法在临床试验中的应用相对较少。我们的目标是:(1)强调OR和多元回归模型作为现代方法基础的巨大潜力;(2)说明它们的易用性;(3)让非数学专业的读者熟悉这些重要方法。OR的优点有多个。(1)它们描述了接受某种治疗的人发生某事件的概率与未接受治疗的人相比的情况,因此是临床试验中分析二元数据时广泛使用的卡方检验的一个受欢迎的替代方法。(2)OR的统计软件广泛可用。(3)使用风险比(RR)的计算比使用OR的计算敏感性更低。(4)OR是荟萃分析、倾向得分、逻辑回归和Cox回归等现代方法的基础。进行分析时,必须使用OR的对数;通过计算反对数得到结果。OR的一个局限性是它们呈现的是相对益处而非绝对益处。尽管OR有相当复杂的数学背景,但即使对于非数学家来说也很容易使用。线性和逻辑回归模型都可以适当地用于提高参数估计(如治疗效果)的精度。我们提醒,虽然使用广泛可用的计算机程序应用这些模型非常容易,但应始终仔细检查回归模型的拟合情况,并且应仔细考虑并精简协变量的选择。我们确实希望本文能促使临床研究人员更频繁地使用OR和多元回归模型。