Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010, USA.
J Vet Intern Med. 2013 May-Jun;27(3):600-3. doi: 10.1111/jvim.12057. Epub 2013 Mar 20.
Odds ratio and risk ratio are measures of association used to describe the efficacy of interventions and disease determinates; however, they are not interchangeable measures of association.
To illustrate that interpretation of the odds ratio as a risk-based measure of efficacy can be misleading.
None.
A meta-analysis reported, the odds ratio and the risk ratio as measures of vaccine effect. Example data were obtained from a meta-analysis of the risk of infection with Tritrichomonas fetus (T. fetus), in trials that assessed whole-cell killed T. fetus vaccination in beef heifers.
When risk was used as the measure of disease frequency, the summary risk ratio was 0.82 (95% CI = 0.7-1.01), a 18% decrease in risk of infection. When odds were used as the measure of disease frequency and the summary odds ratio was 0.41 (95% CI = 0.2-0.84), a 59% decrease in odds of infection.
Problems arise for clinicians or authors when they interpret the odds ratio as a risk ratio. In the example provided, the efficacy of protective interventions was overestimated. In the case of disease determinates that increase the occurrence of disease, the interpretation of the odds ratio as a risk ratio would also lead to overestimation of the effect. It is important not to use the terms risk or probability of disease when the odds are the measure of disease frequency.
比值比和风险比是用于描述干预效果和疾病决定因素的关联度量，但它们不是可互换的关联度量。
说明将比值比解释为基于风险的疗效度量可能会产生误导。
无。
报告了一项荟萃分析，其中比值比和风险比被用作疫苗效果的度量。示例数据来自对 Tritrichomonas fetus（T. fetus）感染风险的荟萃分析，该分析评估了全细胞灭活 T. fetus 疫苗在肉牛中的效果。
当风险用作疾病频率的度量时，汇总风险比为 0.82（95%置信区间= 0.7-1.01），感染风险降低 18%。当使用比值比作为疾病频率的度量，且汇总比值比为 0.41（95%置信区间= 0.2-0.84）时，感染的几率降低 59%。
当临床医生或作者将比值比解释为风险比时，就会出现问题。在提供的示例中，保护干预措施的效果被高估了。对于增加疾病发生的疾病决定因素，将比值比解释为风险比也会导致对效果的高估。当疾病频率的度量是比值比时，重要的是不要使用疾病的风险或概率术语。
