PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10221326

Re: "Confidence limits made easy: interval estimation using a substitution method".

S Greenland
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Confidence IntervalsCommentLetter

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Greenland. 1999-05-01. Re: "Confidence limits made easy: interval estimation using a substitution method".. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009905

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

[Roaming through methodology. XXI. How to arrive at a weighed total score of separate items of a questionnaire].

In medical research the responses of patients to a number of items are often combined into a summary measure or total score for a more general patient characteristic, such as mobility. Clinical and statistical criteria exist for determining the weight of each question in the total score. The choice of weights may affect the differences between patients. The total score is often analysed statistically as if it had interval level of measurement, thereby allowing conclusions about the size of differences between patients, but it has merely an ordinal level. The incorrectness of the interval assumption may also affect differences between patients or patient groups. Finally, differences between patients are less dependent on the weighting of the items and on the assumption of an interval scale as the total score is based on more homogeneous items. Standard statistical software contains statistical methods for determining the homogeneity as well as the weights.

Confidence Intervals↗
PubMed2000

Role of vaccinations as risk factors for ill health in veterans of the Gulf war: cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the relation between ill health after the Gulf war and vaccines received before or during the conflict. To test the hypothesis that such ill health is limited to military personnel who received multiple vaccines during deployment and that pesticide use modifies any effect. DESIGN: Cross sectional study of Gulf war veterans followed for six to eight years after deployment. SETTING: UK armed forces. PARTICIPANTS: Military personnel who served in the Gulf and who still had their vaccine records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Multisymptom illness as classified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; fatigue; psychological distress; post-traumatic stress reaction; health perception; and physical functioning. RESULTS: The response rate for the original survey was 70.4% (n=3284). Of these, 28% (923) had vaccine records. Receipt of multiple vaccines before deployment was associated with only one of the six health outcomes (post-traumatic stress reaction). By contrast five of the six outcomes (all but post-traumatic stress reaction) were associated with multiple vaccines received during deployment. The strongest association was for the multisymptom illness (odds ratio 5.0; 95% confidence interval 2.5 to 9.8). CONCLUSION: Among veterans of the Gulf war there is a specific relation between multiple vaccinations given during deployment and later ill health. Multiple vaccinations in themselves do not seem to be harmful but combined with the "stress" of deployment they may be associated with adverse health outcomes. These results imply that every effort should be made to maintain routine vaccines during peacetime.

Confidence Intervals↗
PubMed2000

Statistical methods in epidemiology. IV. Confounding and the matched pairs odds ratio.

PURPOSE: This paper introduces readers to the problem of confounding in epidemiology, how it differs from effect modification and how to deal with it statistically. There are several options for dealing with confounding. These include techniques based on matching, on stratification and on regression. This paper reviews the first method, matching and the matched pairs odds ratio. METHOD: For 1:1 pair matching (1 case and 1 matched control), the matched pairs odds ratio is introduced as the ratio of discordant pairs. A method for calculating confidence intervals based on the normal approximation is described. RESULTS: Some properties of the matched pair design are illustrated by taking examples from the authors' own teaching experiences. CONCLUSION: Matching remains a difficult design option in epidemiology. Its 'best' use is for special types of studies such as for those on twin pairs.

Confidence Intervals↗