{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,30]],"date-time":"2026-07-30T15:47:52Z","timestamp":1785426472558,"version":"3.56.0"},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]],"date-time":"2022-05-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1653868800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]],"date-time":"2022-05-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1653868800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"cancerfonden","award":["16 0497"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["16 0497"]}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100004047","name":"Karolinska Institute","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100004047","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Med Res Methodol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Despite the ease of interpretation and communication of a risk ratio (RR), and several other advantages in specific settings, the odds ratio (OR) is more commonly reported in epidemiological and clinical research. This is due to the familiarity of the logistic regression model for estimating adjusted ORs from data gathered in a cross-sectional, cohort or case-control design. The preservation of the OR (but not RR) in case-control samples has contributed to the perception that it is the only valid measure of relative risk from case-control samples. For cohort or cross-sectional data, a method known as \u2018doubling-the-cases\u2019 provides valid estimates of RR and an expression for a robust standard error has been derived, but is not available in statistical software packages.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>In this paper, we first describe the doubling-of-cases approach in the cohort setting and then extend its application to case-control studies by incorporating sampling weights and deriving an expression for a robust standard error. The performance of the estimator is evaluated using simulated data, and its application illustrated in a study of neonatal jaundice. We provide an R package that implements the method for any standard design.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Our work illustrates that the doubling-of-cases approach for estimating an adjusted RR from cross-sectional or cohort data can also yield valid RR estimates from case-control data. The approach is straightforward to apply, involving simple modification of the data followed by logistic regression analysis. The method performed well for case-control data from simulated cohorts with a range of prevalence rates. In the application to neonatal jaundice, the RR estimates were similar to those from relative risk regression, whereas the OR from naive logistic regression overestimated the RR despite the low prevalence of the outcome.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>By providing an R package that estimates an adjusted RR from cohort, cross-sectional or case-control studies, we have enabled the method to be easily implemented with familiar software, so that investigators are not limited to reporting an OR and can examine the RR when it is of interest.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]],"date-time":"2022-05-30T11:03:54Z","timestamp":1653908634000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":7,"title":["Estimating risk ratio from any standard epidemiological design by doubling the cases"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"22","author":[{"given":"Yilin","family":"Ning","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Anastasia","family":"Lam","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Marie","family":"Reilly","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]]},"reference":[{"key":"1636_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"365","DOI":"10.1007\/BF01721219","volume":"11","author":"M Nurminen","year":"1995","unstructured":"Nurminen M. To use or not to use the odds ratio in epidemiologic analyses?Eur J Epidemiol. 1995; 11:365\u201371. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/BF01721219.","journal-title":"Eur J Epidemiol"},{"issue":"30","key":"1636_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5730","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.7059","volume":"35","author":"A Tamhane","year":"2016","unstructured":"Tamhane A, Westfall A, Burkholder G, Cutter G. Prevalence odds ratio versus prevalence ratio: choice comes with consequences. Stat Med. 2016; 35(30):5730\u201335. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.7059.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"key":"1636_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"178","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2021.06.007","volume":"138","author":"S Greenland","year":"2021","unstructured":"Greenland S. Noncollapsibility, confounding, and sparse-data bias. part 1: The oddities of odds. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 138:178\u201381. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2021.06.007.","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"2","key":"1636_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"859","DOI":"10.1111\/1475-6773.12712","volume":"53","author":"E Norton","year":"2018","unstructured":"Norton E, Dowd B. Log odds and the interpretation of logit models. Health Serv Res. 2018; 53(2):859\u201378. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1475-6773.12712.","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"issue":"1","key":"1636_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"84","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2018.6971","volume":"320","author":"E Norton","year":"2018","unstructured":"Norton E, Dowd B, Maciejewski M. Odds ratios-current best practice and use. JAMA. 2018; 320(1):84\u201385. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2018.6971.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"1636_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Chatterjee A, Woodruff H, Wu G, Lambin P. Limitations of only reporting the odds ratio in the age of precision medicine: A deterministic simulation study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021; 8(640854). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fmed.2021.640854.","DOI":"10.3389\/fmed.2021.640854"},{"issue":"1","key":"1636_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.5334\/aogh.2411","volume":"85","author":"J Gallis","year":"2019","unstructured":"Gallis J, Turner E. Relative measures of association for binary outcomes: Challenges and recommendations for the global health researcher. Ann Glob Health. 2019; 85(1):1\u201312. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5334\/aogh.2581.","journal-title":"Ann Glob Health"},{"key":"1636_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"452","DOI":"10.1016\/S1047-2797(01)00278-2","volume":"12","author":"A Robbins","year":"2002","unstructured":"Robbins A, Chao S, Fonseca V. What\u2019s the relative risk? a method to directly estimate risk ratios in cohort studies of common outcomes. Ann Epidemiol. 2002; 12:452\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/s1047-2797(01)00278-2.","journal-title":"Ann Epidemiol"},{"key":"1636_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"940","DOI":"10.1093\/aje\/kwg074","volume":"157","author":"L-A McNutt","year":"2003","unstructured":"McNutt L-A, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner J. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol. 2003; 157:940\u201343. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/aje\/kwg074.","journal-title":"Am J Epidemiol"},{"key":"1636_CR10","first-page":"861","volume":"50","author":"J Lee","year":"1993","unstructured":"Lee J, Chia K. Estimation of prevalence rate ratios for cross sectional data:an example in occupational epidemiology. Br J Ind Med. 1993; 50:861\u201364.","journal-title":"Br J Ind Med"},{"issue":"19","key":"1636_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1690","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.280.19.1690","volume":"280","author":"J Zhang","year":"1998","unstructured":"Zhang J, Yu K. What\u2019s the relative risk? a method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA. 1998; 280(19):1690\u20131. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.280.19.1690.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"8","key":"1636_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"895","DOI":"10.1503\/cmaj.101715","volume":"184","author":"M Knol","year":"2012","unstructured":"Knol M, Le Cessie S, Algra A, Vandenbroucke J, Groenwold R. Overestimation of risk ratios by odds ratios in trials and cohort studies: alternatives to logistic regression. Can Med Assoc J. 2012; 184(8):895\u201399. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1503\/cmaj.101715.","journal-title":"Can Med Assoc J"},{"key":"1636_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"7","DOI":"10.5271\/sjweh.2479","volume":"8","author":"O Miettinen","year":"1982","unstructured":"Miettinen O. Design options in epidemiologic research. an update. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1982; 8:7\u201314.","journal-title":"Scand J Work Environ Health"},{"issue":"18","key":"1636_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1733","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.4780121808","volume":"12","author":"E Schouten","year":"1993","unstructured":"Schouten E, Dekker J, Kok F, Le Cessie S, Van Houwelingen H, Pool J, Vanderbroucke J. Risk ratio and rate ratio estimation in case-cohort designs: Hypertension and cardiovascular mortality. Stat Med. 1993; 12(18):1733\u201345. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.4780121808.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"1636_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1002\/bimj.200410165","volume":"48","author":"L Blizzard","year":"2006","unstructured":"Blizzard L, Hosmer D. Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit in log binomial regression. Biom J. 2006; 48(1):5\u201322. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/bimj.200410165.","journal-title":"Biom J"},{"key":"1636_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4009","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.2398","volume":"24","author":"M Reilly","year":"2005","unstructured":"Reilly M, Torrang A, Klint A. Re-use of case\u2014control data for analysis of new outcome variables. Stat Med. 2005; 24:4009\u201319. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/sim.2398.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"key":"1636_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Deeks J, Altman D, Bradburn M. Statistical Methods for Examining Heterogeneity and Combining Results from Several Studies in Meta-Analysis: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008, pp. 285\u2013312. Chap. 15. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/9780470693926.ch15.","DOI":"10.1002\/9780470693926.ch15"},{"key":"1636_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"501","DOI":"10.1136\/oem.2007.034777","volume":"65","author":"J Deddens","year":"2008","unstructured":"Deddens J, Petersen M. Approaches for estimating prevalence ratios. Occup Environ Med. 2008; 65:501\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/oem.2007.034777.","journal-title":"Occup Environ Med"},{"key":"1636_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"174","DOI":"10.1093\/oxfordjournals.aje.a114212","volume":"123","author":"S Wacholder","year":"1986","unstructured":"Wacholder S. Binomial regression in glim, estimating risk ratios and risk differences. Am J Epidemiol. 1986; 123:174\u201384.","journal-title":"Am J Epidemiol"},{"key":"1636_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1064","DOI":"10.1093\/ije\/24.5.1064","volume":"24","author":"C Zocchetti","year":"1995","unstructured":"Zocchetti C, Consonni D, Bertazzi P. Re: Estimation of prevalence rate ratios from cross-sectional data (letter). Int J Epidemiol. 1995; 24:1064\u2013105.","journal-title":"Int J Epidemiol"},{"key":"1636_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"91","DOI":"10.1093\/ije\/27.1.91","volume":"27","author":"T Skov","year":"1998","unstructured":"Skov T, Deddens J, Petersen M, Endahl L. Prevalence proportion ratios: estimation and hypothesis testing. Int J Epidemiol. 1998; 27:91\u201395.","journal-title":"Int J Epidemiol"},{"issue":"12","key":"1636_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1444","DOI":"10.1111\/apa.13470","volume":"105","author":"B Lee","year":"2016","unstructured":"Lee B, Le Ray I, Sun J, Wikman A, Reilly M, Johansson S. Haemolytic and nonhaemolytic neonatal jaundice have different risk factor profiles. Acta Paediatr. 2016; 105(12):1444\u201350. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/apa.13470.","journal-title":"Acta Paediatr"},{"issue":"19","key":"1636_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2041","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2018.14417","volume":"320","author":"J Sonis","year":"2018","unstructured":"Sonis J. Odds ratios vs risk ratios. JAMA. 2018; 320(19):2041. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2018.14417.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"1636_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1027","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2018.12115","volume":"320","author":"T Irony","year":"2018","unstructured":"Irony T. Case-control studies: Using \u201creal-world\u201d evidence to assess association. JAMA. 2018; 320:1027\u201328. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2018.12115.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"4","key":"1636_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"819","DOI":"10.1093\/neuros\/nyy590","volume":"84","author":"E Dupepe","year":"2019","unstructured":"Dupepe E, Kicielinski K, Gordon A, Walters B. What is a case-control study?. Neurosurgery. 2019; 84(4):819\u201326. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/neuros\/nyy590.","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"8","key":"1636_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"806","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2018.20253","volume":"321","author":"T Blakely","year":"2019","unstructured":"Blakely T, Pearce N, Lynch J. Case-control studies. JAMA. 2019; 321(8):806\u201307. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2018.20253.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"2","key":"1636_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"299","DOI":"10.1093\/biomet\/82.2.299","volume":"82","author":"M Reilly","year":"1995","unstructured":"Reilly M, Pepe M. A mean score method for missing and auxiliary covariate data in regression models. Biometrika. 1995; 82(2):299\u2013314.","journal-title":"Biometrika"},{"issue":"6","key":"1636_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1087","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.2015-2001","volume":"136","author":"M Norman","year":"2015","unstructured":"Norman M, \u00c5berg K, Holmsten K, Weibel V, Ek\u00e9us C. Predicting nonhemolytic neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. Pediatrics. 2015; 136(6):1087\u201394. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1542\/peds.2015-2001.","journal-title":"Pediatrics"},{"key":"1636_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"213","DOI":"10.1093\/aje\/kwh022","volume":"159","author":"J Deddens","year":"2004","unstructured":"Deddens J, Petersen M. Re: \u2018estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes\u2019. Am J Epidemiol. 2004; 159:213\u201315.","journal-title":"Am J Epidemiol"},{"key":"1636_CR30","unstructured":"Deddens J, Petersen M, Lei X. Estimation of prevalence ratios when proc genmod does not converge. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual SAS Users Group International Conference (March 30\u2013April 2): 2003. http:\/\/www2.sas.com\/proceedings\/sugi28\/270-28.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2022."}],"container-title":["BMC Medical Research Methodology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]],"date-time":"2022-05-30T11:06:30Z","timestamp":1653908790000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1636"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-022-01636-3","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-2288"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2288","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2022,5,30]]},"assertion":[{"value":"23 August 2021","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"12 May 2022","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"30 May 2022","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"N\/A, no new data were used for this study.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and Consent to participate"}},{"value":"N\/A.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"157"}}