Cited by 298Statistical Methods in EpidemiologyGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Point and interval estimates of partial population attributable risks in cohort studies: examples and software.

Spiegelman, D., Hertzmark, E., Wand, H. C.·2007·Cancer Causes & Control

Abstract

The concept of the population attributable risk (PAR) percent has found widespread application in public health research. This quantity describes the proportion of a disease which could be prevented if a specific exposure were to be eliminated from a target population. We present methods for obtaining point and interval estimates of partial PARs, where the impact on disease burden for some presumably modifiable determinants is estimated in, and applied to, a cohort study. When the disease is multifactorial, the partial PAR must, in general, be used to quantify the proportion of disease which can be prevented if a specific exposure or group of exposures is eliminated from a target population, while the distribution of other modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors is unchanged. The methods are illustrated in a study of risk factors for bladder cancer incidence (Michaud DS et al., New England J Med 340 (1999) 1390). A user-friendly SAS macro implementing the methods described in this paper is available via the worldwide web.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10552-006-0090-y

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If there is correlation between exposure and disease-specific mortality due to correlations with other risks or unobserved factors, the equations may under- or over-estimate the true population-attributable fraction when used with adjusted relative risks.

    “However, if there is also a correlation between exposure and disease-specific mortality, due to correlations of exposure with other risks or other unobserved factors, the above equations may result in under- (when there is positive correlation) or over-estimation (negative correlation) of the true PAF when used with adjusted RRs [32]–[36].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 298

Authors
Spiegelman, D., Hertzmark, E., & Wand, H. C.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Spiegelman, D.
Venue
Cancer Causes & Control
Published
2007-03-26
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
571-579
ISSN
  • 0957-5243 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7225
OpenAlex
W2147687825
Cited by
298
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 18
FWCI
7.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cancer Causes & Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
interval estimation, cohort studies, modifiable risk factors, complex diseases, bladder cancer, SAS macro, disease burden
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Urinary Bladder Neoplasms, Drinking Behavior, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Primary Prevention, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Smoking, Software, Models, Statistical, Cohort Studies, Prevalence, Poisson Distribution, Cost of Illness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review