Categorisation of continuous exposure variables revisited. A response to the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study

被引:29
作者
Froslie, Kathrine F. [1 ,2 ]
Roislien, Jo [2 ]
Laake, Petter [2 ]
Henriksen, Tore
Qvigstad, Elisabeth [1 ,3 ]
Veierod, Marit B. [2 ]
机构
[1] Natl Hosp Norway, Oslo Univ Hosp, Div Obstet & Gynaecol, Natl Resource Ctr Womens Hlth, Oslo, Norway
[2] Univ Oslo, Inst Basic Med Sci, Dept Biostat, N-0316 Oslo, Norway
[3] Natl Hosp Norway, Oslo Univ Hosp, Dept Med, Endocrinol Sect, Oslo, Norway
关键词
REGRESSION;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-10-103
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Although the general statistical advice is to keep continuous exposure variables as continuous in statistical analyses, categorisation is still a common approach in medical research. In a recent paper from the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study, categorisation of body mass index (BMI) was used when analysing the effect of BMI on adverse pregnancy outcomes. The lowest category, labelled "underweight", was used as the reference category. Methods: The present paper gives a summary of reasons for categorisation and methodological drawbacks of this approach. We also discuss the choice of reference category and alternative analyses. We exemplify our arguments by a reanalysis of results from the HAPO paper. Results: Categorisation of continuous exposure data results in loss of power and other methodological challenges. An unfortunate choice of reference category can give additional lack of precision and obscure the interpretation of risk estimates. A highlighted odds ratio (OR) in the HAPO study is the OR for birth weight > 90(th) percentile for women in the highest compared to the lowest BMI category ("obese class III" versus "underweight"). This estimate was OR = 4.55 and OR = 3.52, with two different multiple logistic regression models. When using the "normal weight" category as the reference, our corresponding estimates were OR = 2.03 and OR = 1.62, respectively. Moreover, our choice of reference category also gave narrower confidence intervals. Summary: Due to several methodological drawbacks, categorisation should be avoided. Modern statistical analyses should be used to analyse continuous exposure data, and to explore non-linear relations. If continuous data are categorised, special attention must be given to the choice of reference category.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Statistics notes - The cost of dichotomising continuous variables
    Altman, DG
    Royston, P
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 332 (7549): : 1080 - 1080
  • [2] Contreras M, 2002, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V78, P69
  • [3] DIFFERENTIAL MISCLASSIFICATION ARISING FROM NONDIFFERENTIAL ERRORS IN EXPOSURE MEASUREMENT
    FLEGAL, KM
    KEYL, PM
    NIETO, FJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1991, 134 (10) : 1233 - 1244
  • [4] Use of spline regression in an analysis of maternal prepregnancy body mass index and adverse birth outcomes: Does it tell us more than we already know?
    Gilboa, Suzanne M.
    Correa, Adolfo
    Alverson, Clinton J.
    [J]. ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 18 (03) : 196 - 205
  • [5] Hosmer W., 2000, Applied Logistic Regression, VSecond
  • [6] Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study: associations with maternal body mass index
    Metzger, B. E.
    [J]. BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2010, 117 (05) : 575 - 584
  • [7] Estimating regression models with unknown break-points
    Muggeo, VMR
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2003, 22 (19) : 3055 - 3071
  • [8] Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice
    Pocock, SJ
    Collier, TJ
    Dandreo, KJ
    de Stavola, BL
    Goldman, MB
    Kalish, LA
    Kasten, LE
    McCormack, VA
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 329 (7471): : 883 - 887
  • [9] Turner Elizabeth L, 2010, Epidemiol Perspect Innov, V7, P9, DOI 10.1186/1742-5573-7-9
  • [10] Leave 'em alone - Why continuous variables should be analyzed as such
    van Walraven, Carl
    Hart, Robert G.
    [J]. NEUROEPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 30 (03) : 138 - 139