IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/usug12/01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Scenario comparisons: How much good can we do?

Author

Listed:
  • Roger Newson

    (National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London)

Abstract

Applied scientists, especially public health scientists, frequently want to know how much good can be caused by a proposed intervention. For instance, they might want to estimate how much we could decrease the level of a disease, in a dream scenario where the whole world stopped smoking, assuming that a regression model fitted to a sample is true. Alternatively, they may want to compare the same scenario between regression models fitted to different datasets, as when disease rates in different subpopulations are standardized to a common distribution of gender and age, using the same logistic regression model with different parameters in each subpopulation. In statistics, scenarios can be defined as alternative versions of a dataset, with the same variables, but with different values in the observations or even with noncorresponding observations. Using regression methods, we may estimate the scenario means of a Y-variable in scenarios with specified X-values and compare these scenario means. In Stata Versions 11 and 12, the standard tool for estimating scenario means is margins. A suite of packages is introduced for estimating scenario means and their comparisons using margins together with nlcom to implement Normalizing and variance–stabilizing transformations. margprev estimates scenario prevalences for binary variables. marglmean estimates scenario arithmetic means for non-negative valued variables. regpar estimates two scenario prevalences, together with their difference, the population attributable risk (PAR). punaf estimates two scenario arithmetic means from cohort or cross-sectional data, together with their ratio, the population unattributable fraction (PUF), which is subtracted from 1 to give the population attributable fraction (PAF). punafcc estimates an arithmetic mean between-scenario rate ratio for cases or nonsurvivors in case–control or survival data, respectively. This mean rate ratio, also known as a PUF, is also subtracted from 1 to estimate a PAF. These packages use the log transformation for arithmetic means and their ratios, the logit transformation for prevalences, and the hyperbolic arctangent or Fisher's z transformation for differences between prevalences. Examples are presented for these packages.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger Newson, 2012. "Scenario comparisons: How much good can we do?," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2012 01, Stata Users Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:usug12:01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/usug2012/UK12_newson_ohp1.pdf
    File Function: presentation materials
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://repec.org/usug2012/UK12_newson_examples1.do
    File Function: sample do-files
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony R. Brady, 1998. "Adjusted population attributable fractions from logistic regression," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(42).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Slavica Trajkova & Angelo d’Errico & Fulvio Ricceri & Francesca Fasanelli & Valeria Pala & Claudia Agnoli & Rosario Tumino & Graziella Frasca & Giovanna Masala & Calogero Saieva & Paolo Chiodini & Ama, 2017. "Impact of preventable risk factors on stroke in the EPICOR study: does gender matter?," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(7), pages 775-786, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna V Wilkinson & Michael D Swartz & Xiaoying Yu & Margaret R Spitz & Sanjay Shete, 2013. "Cigarette Experimentation and the Population Attributable Fraction for Associated Genetic and Non-Genetic Risk Factors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Mark S. Pearce & Heather O. Dickinson & Murray Aitkin & Louise Parker, 2002. "Still‐births among the offspring of male radiation workers at the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant: detailed results and statistical aspects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 165(3), pages 523-548, October.
    3. Cox, Christopher & Li, Xiuhong, 2012. "Model-based estimation of the attributable risk: A loglinear approach," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(12), pages 4180-4189.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:usug12:01. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.