Author
Abstract
Logistic response models form the backbone of much applied quantitative research in epidemiology and the social sciences. However, recent methodological research highlights difficulties in interpreting odds ratios, particularly in a multivariate modeling setting. These difficulties arise from the fact that coefficients from nonlinear probability models such as the logistic response model (for example, log odds-ratios) depend on model specification in ways that differ from the linear model. Applied researchers have responded to this situation by reporting marginal effects on the probability scale implied by the nonlinear probability model or obtained by the linear probability model. Although marginal effects on the probability scale have many desirable properties, they do not align well with research in which relative inequality is a key concept. We argue that, in many cases, the odds ratio is preferable because it is a relative measure that does not depend on the marginal distribution of the dependent variable. In our presentation, we aim to remedy the declining popularity of the odds ratio by introducing what we term the "marginal odds ratio", that is, logit coefficients that have similar properties as marginal effects on the probability scale but that retain the odds-ratio interpretation. We define the marginal odds ratio theoretically in terms of potential outcomes, both for binary and continuous treatments, we develop estimation methods using three different approaches (G-computation, inverse probability weighting, RIF regression), and we present examples that illustrate the usefulness and interpretation of the marginal odds ratio.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:boc:csug22:11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.