Create Presentation
Download Presentation

Download Presentation

Basic epidemiologic analysis with Stata

Download Presentation
## Basic epidemiologic analysis with Stata

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

**Basic epidemiologic analysis with Stata**Biostatistics 212 Lecture 5**Housekeeping**• Turning in Lab assignments: • “PletcherMark_Lab2.do” • “Window management” in Stata 9 • Questions about Lab 2? • Lab 3: do today, due 10/25/05 • Lab 4 now available**Housekeeping**• Time to start thinking about Final Projects! • What data will you use? • Start cleaning, exploring, planning tables and figures**Today...**• What’s the difference between epidemiologic and statistical analysis? • Interaction and confounding with 2 x 2’s • Stata’s “Epitab” commands**Epi vs. Biostats**• Epidemiologic analysis – Interpreting clinical research data in the context of scientific knowledge • Biostatistical analysis – Evaluating the role of chance**Epi vs. Biostats**• Epi –Confounding, interaction, and causal diagrams. • What to adjust for? • What do the adjusted estimates mean? C A B A C B**2 x 2 Tables**• “Contingency tables” are the traditional analytic tool of the epidemiologist Outcome + - + - a b OR = (a/b) /(c/d) = ad/bc RR = a/(a+b) / c/(c+d) Exposure c d**2 x 2 Tables**• Example Coronary calcium + - + - 106 585 691 OR = 2.1 (1.6 – 2.7) RR = 1.9 (1.6 – 2.4) Binge drinking 186 2165 2351 292 2750 3042**2 x 2 Tables**• There is a statistically significant association, but is it causal? • Does male gender confound the association? Male Binge drinking Coronary calcium**2 x 2 Tables**CAC • First, stratify… + - + - RR = 1.94 (1.55-2.42) Binge In men In women CAC CAC + - + - (34%) (14%) + - + - Binge Binge (15%) (7%) RR = 1.50 (1.16-1.93) RR = 1.57 (0.94-2.62)**2 x 2 Tables**• …compare strata-specific estimates… • (they’re about the same) In men In women CAC CAC + - + - (34%) (14%) + - + - Binge Binge (15%) (7%) RR = 1.50 (1.16-1.93) RR = 1.57 (0.94-2.62)**2 x 2 Tables**CAC • …compare to the crude estimate + - + - RR = 1.94 (1.55-2.42) Binge In men In women CAC CAC + - + - (34%) (14%) + - + - Binge Binge (15%) (7%) RR = 1.50 (1.16-1.93) RR = 1.57 (0.94-2.62)**2 x 2 Tables**• …and then adjust the summary estimate. In men In women CAC CAC + - + - + - + - Binge Binge RR = 1.50 (1.16-1.93) RR = 1.57 (0.94-2.62) RRadj = 1.51 (1.21-1.89)**+ -**+ - RR = 1.94 (1.55-2.42) Binge In men In women CAC CAC + - + - (34%) (14%) + - + - Binge Binge (15%) (7%) RR = 1.50 (1.16-1.93) RR = 1.57 (0.94-2.62) RRadj = 1.51 (1.21-1.89)**2 x 2 Tables**• Tabulate – output not exactly what we want. • The “epitab” commands • Stata’s answer to stratified analyses cs, cc, ir csi, cci, iri tabodds, mhodds**2 x 2 Tables**• Example – demo using Stata cs cac binge cs cac binge, by(male) cs cac modalc cs cac modalc, by(racegender)**2 x 2 Tables**• Example – demo using Stata cc cac binge**2 x 2 Tables**• Epitab subtleties • ir command • Rate ratios, adjusted etc • Related to poisson regression • Intermediate commands – csi, cci, iri • No dataset required – just 2x2 cell frequencies csi a b c d csi 106 186 585 2165 (for cac binge)**Summary**• Stare at stratified 2x2 analyses until you get it! • Epitab commands are a great way to explore your data • Emphasis on interaction • Immediate commands (e.g. csi) are very useful – just watch out for the b c switch!**Next week**• Testing for trend • Adjusting for many things at once • Logistic regression • Lab 4 • Epi analysis of coronary calcium dataset • More practice with Do files • Moderately long