首页> 外文学位 >Empirical comparisons of logistic regression, Poisson regression, and Cox proportional hazards modeling in analysis of occupational cohort data
【24h】

Empirical comparisons of logistic regression, Poisson regression, and Cox proportional hazards modeling in analysis of occupational cohort data

机译:Logistic回归,Poisson回归和Cox比例风险建模在职业人群数据分析中的经验比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Three multiplicative models commonly used in the analysis of occupational cohort studies are logistic, Poisson, and Cox proportional hazards regression. Although the underlying theories behind these are well known, this has not always led to clear decisions for selecting which to use in practice. This research was conducted to examine the effect model choice has on the epidemiologic interpretation of occupational cohort data.;The three models were applied to a National Cancer Institute historical cohort of formaldehyde-exposed workers. Samples were taken from this dataset to create scenarios for model comparisons, varying the study size (n = 600, 3000, 6000), proportion of subjects experiencing the outcome (2.5%, 10%, 50%), strength of association between exposure and outcome (weak, moderate, strong), follow-up length (5, 15, 30 years), and proportion of subjects lost to follow-up (0%, 10%, 17.5%). Other factors investigated included how to handle subjects lost to follow-up in logistic regression. Models were compared on risk estimates, confidence intervals, and practical issues such as ease of use.;The Poisson and Cox models yielded nearly identical relative risks and confidence intervals in all situations except when confounding by age could not be closely controlled in the Poisson analysis, which occurred when the sample size was small or outcome was rare. Logistic regression findings were more variable, with risk estimates differing most from the Cox results when there was a common outcome or strong relative risk. Logistic was also less precise than the others. Thus, although logistic was the easiest model to implement, it should only be used in occupational cohort studies when the outcome is rare (5% or less), and the relative risk is less than about 2. Even then, since it does not account for follow-up time differences between subjects or changes in risk factors values over time, the Cox or Poisson models are better choices. Selecting between these can usually be based on convenience, except when confounding cannot be closely controlled in the Poisson model but can in the Cox model, or when the Poisson assumption of exponential baseline survival is not met. In these cases Cox should be used.
机译:Logistic,Poisson和Cox比例风险回归是在职业队列研究分析中常用的三种乘法模型。尽管这些背后的基本理论是众所周知的,但这并不总是导致在选择实际使用哪种方法时做出明确的决定。本研究旨在检验模型选择对职业队列数据的流行病学解释的影响。;这三个模型被应用于美国国家癌症研究所的甲醛暴露工人的历史队列。从该数据集中抽取样本,以创建用于模型比较的方案,改变研究规模(n = 600、3000、6000),经历结果的受试者比例(2.5%,10%,50%),暴露与接触之间的关联强度结果(弱,中,强),随访时间(5、15、30年)和失去随访对象的比例(0%,10%,17.5%)。调查的其他因素包括如何处理逻辑回归中因随访而丢失的受试者。在风险估计,置信区间和实际问题(如易用性)等方面对模型进行了比较;在所有情况下,Poisson和Cox模型的相对风险和置信区间几乎相同,除非在Poisson分析中无法严格控制年龄混淆,这种情况发生在样本量较小或结果很少的情况下。 Logistic回归结果的变化更大,当存在共同的结果或较强的相对风险时,风险估计与Cox结果的差异最大。后勤也不如其他人那么精确。因此,尽管逻辑学是最容易实现的模型,但仅在结局很少(5%或更少)且相对风险小于2的情况下,才应将其用于职业队列研究。对于受试者之间的随访时间差异或风险因子值随时间的变化,Cox或Poisson模型是更好的选择。通常可以基于便利性进行选择,除非无法在Poisson模型中紧密控制混杂,而在Cox模型中可以紧密控制混杂,或者无法满足指数基线生存的Poisson假设。在这些情况下,应使用Cox。

著录项

  • 作者

    Callas, Peter W.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Massachusetts Amherst.;

  • 授予单位 University of Massachusetts Amherst.;
  • 学科 Public health.;Biostatistics.;Occupational safety.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1994
  • 页码 264 p.
  • 总页数 264
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:49:58

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号