分析和解释数据

R. Dicker
{"title":"分析和解释数据","authors":"R. Dicker","doi":"10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195313802.003.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A well-planned and carefully executed analysis is essential for any epidemiologic study, even one conducted during the frenzy of a field investigation. An analysis plan, or at least table shells, should be drafted to guide the analysis. To assess the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome, measures of association should be used that are appropriate for the study design—risk ratios for cohort studies, odds ratios for case–control studies, and prevalence ratios for cross-sectional studies. Measures of public health impact can be calculated to reflect the contribution of an exposure, either harmful or beneficial, on occurrence of the outcome among a population. Although tests of statistical significance address the role of chance in an apparent exposure–outcome association, they largely have been replaced by confidence intervals that reflect the range of values of the association that are consistent with the study data. When two or more exposures seem to be associated with the outcome, or when confounding might be present, stratified analysis and logistic regression can be used to clarify the contributions of each exposure. Before accepting that an apparent association is real, consider whether chance, bias, or investigator error might account for the finding. The strength of the evidence, as well as epidemiologic judgment, should guide public health decision-making and action.","PeriodicalId":371391,"journal":{"name":"The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"36","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyzing and Interpreting Data\",\"authors\":\"R. Dicker\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195313802.003.0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A well-planned and carefully executed analysis is essential for any epidemiologic study, even one conducted during the frenzy of a field investigation. An analysis plan, or at least table shells, should be drafted to guide the analysis. To assess the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome, measures of association should be used that are appropriate for the study design—risk ratios for cohort studies, odds ratios for case–control studies, and prevalence ratios for cross-sectional studies. Measures of public health impact can be calculated to reflect the contribution of an exposure, either harmful or beneficial, on occurrence of the outcome among a population. Although tests of statistical significance address the role of chance in an apparent exposure–outcome association, they largely have been replaced by confidence intervals that reflect the range of values of the association that are consistent with the study data. When two or more exposures seem to be associated with the outcome, or when confounding might be present, stratified analysis and logistic regression can be used to clarify the contributions of each exposure. Before accepting that an apparent association is real, consider whether chance, bias, or investigator error might account for the finding. The strength of the evidence, as well as epidemiologic judgment, should guide public health decision-making and action.\",\"PeriodicalId\":371391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"36\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195313802.003.0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195313802.003.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

摘要

对于任何流行病学研究,即使是在狂热的实地调查期间进行的研究,精心策划和仔细执行的分析也是必不可少的。应该起草一个分析计划,或者至少是表壳来指导分析。为了评估暴露与健康结果之间的关系,应该使用适合研究设计的关联度量——队列研究的风险比、病例对照研究的优势比和横断面研究的患病率比。可以计算公共卫生影响的措施,以反映有害或有益的暴露对人群中结果发生的贡献。虽然统计显著性检验解决了机会在明显的暴露-结果关联中的作用,但它们在很大程度上已被反映与研究数据一致的关联值范围的置信区间所取代。当两种或两种以上的暴露似乎与结果有关,或者当可能存在混淆时,可以使用分层分析和逻辑回归来澄清每种暴露的贡献。在接受一个明显的联系是真实的之前,考虑是否偶然,偏见,或研究者的错误可能解释这个发现。证据的力度以及流行病学判断应指导公共卫生决策和行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analyzing and Interpreting Data
A well-planned and carefully executed analysis is essential for any epidemiologic study, even one conducted during the frenzy of a field investigation. An analysis plan, or at least table shells, should be drafted to guide the analysis. To assess the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome, measures of association should be used that are appropriate for the study design—risk ratios for cohort studies, odds ratios for case–control studies, and prevalence ratios for cross-sectional studies. Measures of public health impact can be calculated to reflect the contribution of an exposure, either harmful or beneficial, on occurrence of the outcome among a population. Although tests of statistical significance address the role of chance in an apparent exposure–outcome association, they largely have been replaced by confidence intervals that reflect the range of values of the association that are consistent with the study data. When two or more exposures seem to be associated with the outcome, or when confounding might be present, stratified analysis and logistic regression can be used to clarify the contributions of each exposure. Before accepting that an apparent association is real, consider whether chance, bias, or investigator error might account for the finding. The strength of the evidence, as well as epidemiologic judgment, should guide public health decision-making and action.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信