基于风险估计的疾病暴发源调查:一项比较Logistic和Poisson回归风险估计的模拟研究

IF 1.3 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Chanapong Rojanaworarit, Jason J Wong
{"title":"基于风险估计的疾病暴发源调查:一项比较Logistic和Poisson回归风险估计的模拟研究","authors":"Chanapong Rojanaworarit, Jason J Wong","doi":"10.31486/toj.18.0166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In epidemiologic investigations of disease outbreaks, multivariable regression techniques with adjustment for confounding can be applied to assess the association between exposure and outcome. Traditionally, logistic regression has been used in analyses of case-control studies to determine the odds ratio (OR) as the effect measure. For rare outcomes (incidence of 5% to 10%), an adjusted OR can be used to approximate the risk ratio (RR). However, concern has been raised about using logistic regression to estimate RR because how closely the calculated OR approximates the RR depends largely on the outcome rate. The literature shows that when the incidence of outcomes exceeds 10%, ORs greatly overestimate RRs. Consequently, in addition to logistic regression, other regression methods to accurately estimate adjusted RRs have been explored. One method of interest is Poisson regression with robust standard errors. This generalized linear model estimates RR directly vs logistic regression that determines OR. The purpose of this study was to empirically compare risk estimates obtained from logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors in terms of effect size and determination of the most likely source in the analysis of a series of simulated single-source disease outbreak scenarios. Methods: We created a prototype dataset to simulate a foodborne outbreak following a public event with 14 food exposures and a 52.0% overall attack rate. Regression methods, including binary logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors, were applied to analyze the dataset. To further examine how these two models led to different conclusions of the potential outbreak source, a series of 5 additional scenarios with decreasing attack rates were simulated and analyzed using both regression models. Results: For each of the explanatory variables—sex, age, and food types—in both univariable and multivariable models, the ORs obtained from logistic regression were estimated further from 1.0 than their corresponding RRs estimated by Poisson regression with robust standard errors. In the simulated scenarios, the Poisson regression models demonstrated greater consistency in the identification of one food type as the most likely outbreak source. Conclusion: Poisson regression with robust standard errors proved to be a decisive and consistent method to estimate risk associated with a single source in an outbreak when the cohort data collection design was used.","PeriodicalId":47600,"journal":{"name":"Ochsner Journal","volume":"19 1","pages":"220 - 226"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the Source of a Disease Outbreak Based on Risk Estimation: A Simulation Study Comparing Risk Estimates Obtained From Logistic and Poisson Regression Applied to a Dichotomous Outcome\",\"authors\":\"Chanapong Rojanaworarit, Jason J Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.31486/toj.18.0166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: In epidemiologic investigations of disease outbreaks, multivariable regression techniques with adjustment for confounding can be applied to assess the association between exposure and outcome. Traditionally, logistic regression has been used in analyses of case-control studies to determine the odds ratio (OR) as the effect measure. For rare outcomes (incidence of 5% to 10%), an adjusted OR can be used to approximate the risk ratio (RR). However, concern has been raised about using logistic regression to estimate RR because how closely the calculated OR approximates the RR depends largely on the outcome rate. The literature shows that when the incidence of outcomes exceeds 10%, ORs greatly overestimate RRs. Consequently, in addition to logistic regression, other regression methods to accurately estimate adjusted RRs have been explored. One method of interest is Poisson regression with robust standard errors. This generalized linear model estimates RR directly vs logistic regression that determines OR. The purpose of this study was to empirically compare risk estimates obtained from logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors in terms of effect size and determination of the most likely source in the analysis of a series of simulated single-source disease outbreak scenarios. Methods: We created a prototype dataset to simulate a foodborne outbreak following a public event with 14 food exposures and a 52.0% overall attack rate. Regression methods, including binary logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors, were applied to analyze the dataset. To further examine how these two models led to different conclusions of the potential outbreak source, a series of 5 additional scenarios with decreasing attack rates were simulated and analyzed using both regression models. Results: For each of the explanatory variables—sex, age, and food types—in both univariable and multivariable models, the ORs obtained from logistic regression were estimated further from 1.0 than their corresponding RRs estimated by Poisson regression with robust standard errors. In the simulated scenarios, the Poisson regression models demonstrated greater consistency in the identification of one food type as the most likely outbreak source. Conclusion: Poisson regression with robust standard errors proved to be a decisive and consistent method to estimate risk associated with a single source in an outbreak when the cohort data collection design was used.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47600,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ochsner Journal\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"220 - 226\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ochsner Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.18.0166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ochsner Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.18.0166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景:在疾病暴发的流行病学调查中,多变量回归技术可用于评估暴露与结果之间的关系。传统上,在病例对照研究的分析中使用逻辑回归来确定优势比(OR)作为效果度量。对于罕见的结果(发生率为5%至10%),可以使用调整后的OR来近似风险比(RR)。然而,对于使用逻辑回归来估计RR,人们提出了担忧,因为计算的OR与RR的接近程度在很大程度上取决于转归率。文献显示,当结局发生率超过10%时,or大大高估了rr。因此,除了逻辑回归之外,人们还探索了其他回归方法来准确估计调整后的rr。我们感兴趣的一种方法是具有稳健标准误差的泊松回归。这个广义线性模型直接估计RR与决定OR的逻辑回归。本研究的目的是在一系列模拟单源疾病暴发情景的分析中,在效应大小和最可能来源的确定方面,对具有稳健标准误差的逻辑回归和泊松回归获得的风险估计进行经验比较。方法:我们创建了一个原型数据集来模拟公共事件后的食源性暴发,其中有14种食物暴露,总发病率为52.0%。采用二元逻辑回归和泊松回归等稳健标准误差回归方法对数据集进行分析。为了进一步研究这两种模型如何得出潜在爆发源的不同结论,使用这两种回归模型模拟和分析了攻击率下降的5种附加场景。结果:在单变量和多变量模型中,对于每个解释变量(性别、年龄和食物类型),逻辑回归得到的or比泊松回归估计的相应rr更接近1.0,具有稳健的标准误差。在模拟情景中,泊松回归模型在确定一种食物类型为最可能的爆发源方面显示出更大的一致性。结论:当使用队列数据收集设计时,具有稳健标准误差的泊松回归被证明是估计暴发中与单一来源相关的风险的决定性和一致的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Investigating the Source of a Disease Outbreak Based on Risk Estimation: A Simulation Study Comparing Risk Estimates Obtained From Logistic and Poisson Regression Applied to a Dichotomous Outcome
Background: In epidemiologic investigations of disease outbreaks, multivariable regression techniques with adjustment for confounding can be applied to assess the association between exposure and outcome. Traditionally, logistic regression has been used in analyses of case-control studies to determine the odds ratio (OR) as the effect measure. For rare outcomes (incidence of 5% to 10%), an adjusted OR can be used to approximate the risk ratio (RR). However, concern has been raised about using logistic regression to estimate RR because how closely the calculated OR approximates the RR depends largely on the outcome rate. The literature shows that when the incidence of outcomes exceeds 10%, ORs greatly overestimate RRs. Consequently, in addition to logistic regression, other regression methods to accurately estimate adjusted RRs have been explored. One method of interest is Poisson regression with robust standard errors. This generalized linear model estimates RR directly vs logistic regression that determines OR. The purpose of this study was to empirically compare risk estimates obtained from logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors in terms of effect size and determination of the most likely source in the analysis of a series of simulated single-source disease outbreak scenarios. Methods: We created a prototype dataset to simulate a foodborne outbreak following a public event with 14 food exposures and a 52.0% overall attack rate. Regression methods, including binary logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust standard errors, were applied to analyze the dataset. To further examine how these two models led to different conclusions of the potential outbreak source, a series of 5 additional scenarios with decreasing attack rates were simulated and analyzed using both regression models. Results: For each of the explanatory variables—sex, age, and food types—in both univariable and multivariable models, the ORs obtained from logistic regression were estimated further from 1.0 than their corresponding RRs estimated by Poisson regression with robust standard errors. In the simulated scenarios, the Poisson regression models demonstrated greater consistency in the identification of one food type as the most likely outbreak source. Conclusion: Poisson regression with robust standard errors proved to be a decisive and consistent method to estimate risk associated with a single source in an outbreak when the cohort data collection design was used.
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
Ochsner Journal
Ochsner Journal MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Ochsner Journal is a quarterly publication designed to support Ochsner"s mission to improve the health of our community through a commitment to innovation in healthcare, medical research, and education. The Ochsner Journal provides an active dialogue on practice standards in today"s changing healthcare environment. Emphasis will be given to topics of great societal and medical significance.
×
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