Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 May;65(5):467-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.09.007. Epub 2011 Dec 31.

Lethal misconceptions: interpretation and bias in studies of traffic deaths.

Abstract

Clinical epidemiology studies are vulnerable to subtle confounding, leading skeptics to claim that an odds ratio below three rarely indicates a clinically important finding. We argue that such a high threshold is inappropriate when interpreting traffic death studies in clinical epidemiology research. We review 10 concepts that emphasize the value of modest effect sizes by taking into account the baseline frequency, nonfatal disability, numbers needed to treat, shared responsibility, event diversity, behavioral offsets, measurement error, indirect reinforcement, delayed progression, and economic affordability. An awareness of these concepts may help when interpreting effect sizes in studies of traffic deaths.

Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PMID:
22212528
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk