dead or alive) can by represented by arranging the observed counts into fourfold (2 by 2) tables. To be precise, it is not correct to say that those who had an incidental appendectomy had 4.2 times more risk (wrong) or 4.2 times greater risk (wrong). The relative risk (or risk ratio) is an intuitive way to compare the risks for the two groups. For the study examining wound infections after incidental appendectomy, the risk of wound infection in each exposure group is estimated from the cumulative incidence. Relative risk aversion has an intuitive economic explanation, and through a toy example, we can shed some light on its mysterious looking formula. We can similarly calculate the cumulative incidence in the patients who did not have an incidental appendectomy, which was 1 divided by 79 or 1.27%. This prospective cohort study was used to investigate the effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on coronary artery disease in post-menopausal women. The cumulative incidence is an estimate of risk. Call us at 727-442-4290 (M-F 9am-5pm ET). However, a value of zero indicates that none of the cases in group 1 had the event occur while x number of cases in group 2 had the event occur; or in other words, the numerator was a zero (A = 0) and the denominator was any number greater than zero (B = x, where x > 0). Relative risk v.s. (1 - 0.57) x 100 = 43% decrease in risk. The relative risk is 16%/28% = 0.57. Some of the data is summarized in the 2x2 table shown below. c. Smokers had 17 times more risk of lung cancer than non-smokers. A subject treated with AZT has 57% the chance of disease progression as a subject treated with placebo. Which of the following would be the best interpretation of this risk ratio? Note also that the unexposed (comparison, reference) group must be specified. 4 th ed. As a reminder, a risk ratio is simply a ratio of two probabilities. % increase = (RR - 1) x 100, e.g. Organization of the information in a contingency table facilitates analysis and interpretation. It should be clear that the hazard ratio is a relative measure of effect and tells us nothing about absolute risk. The relative risk (RR) of an event is the likelihood of its occurrence after exposure to a risk variable as compared with the likelihood of its occurrence in a control or reference group. All Rights Reserved. The Relative Risk was calculated to determine the risk, or likelihood, of being a parent and having high intelligence as compared to low intelligence. Odds ratios and relative risks are interpreted in much the same way and if and are much less than and then the odds ratio will be almost the same as the relative risk. Subjects who underwent incidental appendectomy had 4.2 times, The rate in those using hormones was 30 / 54,308.7 = 55.2 per 100,000 person-years. Date last modified: March 19, 2018. RR is easy to compute and interpret and is included in standard statistical software. The relative risk of a response to the mailing is the ratio of the probability that a newspaper subscriber responds, to the probability that a nonsubscriber responds. Relative Risk utilizes the probability of an event occurring in one group compared to the probability of an event occurring in the other group. Let’s look at an example. So no evidence that drinking wine can either protect against or increase the risk of heart disease Subjects who underwent incidental appendectomy had 4.2, Subjects who underwent incidental appendectomy were 4.2. Odds ratio vs relative risk. In all cases, statistical significance is assumed if the 95% confidence interval (CI) around the relative risk does not include 1.0. What is the rate ratio? This can be used to express the risk of a state, behavior or strategy as compared to a baseline risk. The RR is estimated as the absolute risk with the risk variable divided by the absolute risk in the control group. A cohort study is conducted to determine whether smoking is associated with an increased risk of bronchitis in adults over the age of 40. The rate in those NOT using hormones was 60 / 51,477.5 = 116.6 per 100,000 person-years. Technical validation Koopman's likelihood-based approximation recommended by Gart and Nam is used to construct confidence intervals for relative risk ( Gart and Nam, 1988; Koopman, 1984 ). Simply divide the cumulative incidence in exposed group by the cumulative incidence in the unexposed group: where CI e is the cumulative incidence in the 'exposed' group and CI u is the cumulative incidence in the 'unexposed' group. Thus, the estimate of the relative risk is simply 13.7%/8.2% = 1.668. London: Chapman and Hall. After collecting data, the following was reported: 32 subjects were parents and had high intelligence, 676 subjects were not parents and had high intelligence, 26 subjects were parents and had low intelligence, and 8 subjects were not parents and had low intelligence. Note that the "exposure" of interest was low-dose aspirin, and the aspirin group is summarized in the top row. A value >1 suggests increase risk, while a value <1 suggest reduction of risk. Meta-analysis may be used to investigate the combination or interaction of a group of independent studies, for example a series of fourfold tables from similar studies conducted at different centres. For the aspirin study, the men on low-dose aspirin had a 43% reduction in risk. The findings are as follows: - The frequency of bronchitis in the smokers is 27 per 1,000 person-years. The services that we offer include: Edit your research questions and null/alternative hypotheses, Write your data analysis plan; specify specific statistics to address the research questions, the assumptions of the statistics, and justify why they are the appropriate statistics; provide references, Justify your sample size/power analysis, provide references, Explain your data analysis plan to you so you are comfortable and confident, Two hours of additional support with your statistician, Quantitative Results Section (Descriptive Statistics, Bivariate and Multivariate Analyses, Structural Equation Modeling, Path analysis, HLM, Cluster Analysis), Conduct descriptive statistics (i.e., mean, standard deviation, frequency and percent, as appropriate), Conduct analyses to examine each of your research questions, Provide APA 6th edition tables and figures, Ongoing support for entire results chapter statistics, Please call 727-442-4290 to request a quote based on the specifics of your research, schedule using the calendar on t his page, or email [email protected], Research Question and Hypothesis Development, Conduct and Interpret a Sequential One-Way Discriminant Analysis, Two-Stage Least Squares (2SLS) Regression Analysis, Meet confidentially with a Dissertation Expert about your project. - The frequency of bronchitis in the non-smokers is 3 per 1,000 person-years. The study population consisted of over 22,000 male physicians who were randomly assigned to either low-dose aspirin or a placebo (an identical looking pill that was inert). Since the relative risk is a simple ratio, errors tend to occur when the terms "more" or "less" are used. Common terms to describe these ratios are, Frequently, the term "relative risk" is used to encompass all of these. They followed these physicians for about five years. Pitfalls: Note that in the interpretation of RR both the appendectomy study (in which the RR > 1), and the aspirin trial (in which RR < 1) used the expression "times the risk." If you were told that your relative risk for multiple sclerosis was 10 - ie, you had a 10 fold increased risk … In meta-analysis for relative risk and odds ratio, studies where a=c=0 or b=d=0 are excluded from the analysis (Higgins & Green, 2011). The group assigned to take aspirin had an incidence of 1.26%, while the placebo (unexposed) group had an incidence of about 2.17%. The relative risk reduction is derived from the relative risk by subtracting it from one, which is the same as the ratio between the ARR and the risk in the control group. A predictor variable with a risk ratio of less than one is often labeled a “protective factor” (at least in Epidemiology). The parameter of interest is the relative risk or risk ratio in the population, RR=p 1 /p 2, and the point estimate is the RR obtained from our samples. Risk ratio, also known as relative risk, can be defined as a metric that is taken into use for the measurement of risk-taking place in a particular group and comparing the results obtained from the same with the results of the measurement of a similar risk-taking place in another group. When RR < 1, % decrease = (1 - RR) x 100, e.g. Calculation. Interpretation: If Relative Risk = 1, there is no association; If Relative Risk < 1, the association is negative; If Relative Risk > 1, the association is positive There were 17 more cases of lung cancer in the smokers. When subjects who took both vitamins were compared to those who took not vitamins at all, the risk ratio was found to be 0.70. b. Smokers had 17% more lung cancers compared to non-smokers. (The risk ratio is also called relative risk.) (4.2 - 1) x 100 = 320% increase in risk. The relative risk and odds ratio of 1 suggests that there is no difference between two groups. Interpretation: Those who had the incidental appendectomy had a 320% increase in risk of getting a post-operative wound infection. In 1982 The Physicians' Health Study (a randomized clinical trial) was begun in order to test whether low-dose aspirin was beneficial in reducing myocardial infarctions (heart attacks). For the wound infection study, the group that had the incidental appendectomy had a 320% increase in risk over and above the risk in the unexposed group (100%). Relative Risk is calculated by dividing the probability of an event occurring for group 1 (A) divided by the probability of an event occurring for group 2 (B). Relative Risk utilizes the probability of an event occurring in one group compared to the probability of an event occurring in the other group. A relative risk of 1.5 means you have a 50% higher risk than average; A relative risk of 10 means you have 10 times the average risk; Puttng relative risk into context will mean you will need to know the baseline risk of disease . It requires the examination of two dichotomous variables, where one variable measures the event (occurred vs. not occurred) and the other variable measures the groups (group 1 vs. group 2). How to interpret the relative risk? The following is the interpretation of the multinomial logistic regression in terms of relative risk ratios and can be obtained by mlogit, rrr after (The relative risk is also called the risk ratio). Relative Risk values are greater than or equal to zero. Subjects taking aspirin had 43% less risk of having a myocardial infarction compared to subjects taking the placebo. In fact, those with the incidental appendectomy had a 320% increase in risk. Relative Risk is considered a descriptive statistic, not an inferential statistic; as it does not determine statistical significance. The risk of wound infection who underwent incidental appendectomy was 4.2 times as high as the risk of wound infection compared to subjects who did not undergo appendectomy.