Re: st: Use of the term 'relative risk ratio'

[Roger Newson <roger.newson@kcl.ac.uk>]

At 11:25 21/04/2005, Ronan Conroy wrote:
> I have a reviewer who is grumbling about the use of 'relative risk ratio' 
> to describe the effect estimates from multinomial logistic regression. And 
> it's the second time this has happened. The reviewer feels that they ought 
> to be called odds ratios, to prevent confusion with relative risks (and 
> that is a good point).
>
> I would like to preserve the distinction between vanilla-flavour odds 
> ratios and relative risk ratios, but am a little unhappy that the term is 
> causing more heat than light.
>
> Has anyone else experienced the problem? Is there a more useful way of 
> describing RRRs out there?
If I wanted to stress that an odds ratio is multinomial instead of binomial 
(or "vanilla-flavour" in Ronan's terminology), then I would call it a 
multinomial odds ratio. The "RRR" of -mlogit- is definitely not a relative 
risk ratio, although, in a case-control study, it may estimate a relative 
risk ratio or even a plain relative risk.

I hope this helps.

Roger



--
Roger Newson
Lecturer in Medical Statistics
Department of Public Health Sciences
Division of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology
King's College London

5th Floor, Capital House
42 Weston Street
London SE1 3QD
United Kingdom

Tel: 020 7848 6648 International +44 20 7848 6648
Fax: 020 7848 6620 International +44 20 7848 6620
  or 020 7848 6605 International +44 20 7848 6605
Email: roger.newson@kcl.ac.uk
Website: http://phs.kcl.ac.uk/rogernewson/

Opinions expressed are those of the author, not the institution.

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/