Requiem for odds ratios
Open accessAbstract
Health Services Research encourages authors to report marginal effects instead of odds ratios for logistic regression with a binary outcome.Specifically, in the instructions for authors, Manuscript Formatting and Submission Requirements, section 2.4.2.2 Structured abstract and keywords, it reads "Reporting of odds ratios is discouraged (marginal effects preferred) except in case-control studies" (see the HSR website https:// www.hsr.org/
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Calculation of odds ratios incorporates unobserved study and modeling error into the denominator, making odds ratios relatively ungeneralizable.
“Calculation of odds ratios incorporates unobserved study and modeling error into the denominator of the calculation, making odds ratios relatively ungeneralizable (Norton et al., 2024).”
From Adequate Care Coordination is Associated with Reduced Unmet Mental Health Needs for Children (2026) · cites this paper as Norton et al., 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- [1]Sackett DL, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Down with odds ratios! Evidence Based Med. 1996; 1(6): 164‐ 166.
- [2]Tajeu GS, Sen B, Allison DB, Menachemi N. Misuse of odds ratios in obesity literature: an empirical analysis of published studies. Obesity. 2012; 20(8): 1726‐ 1731. 22436842 PMC3399983
- [3]Norton EC, Dowd BE. Log odds and the interpretation of logit models. Health Serv Res. 2018; 53(2): 859‐ 878. 28560732 PMC5867187
- [4]Norton EC, Dowd BE, Maciejewski ML. Odds ratios—current best practice and use. JAMA. 2018; 320(1): 84‐ 85. 29971384
- [5]Mroz TA, Zayats YV. Arbitrarily normalized coefficients, Information sets, and false reports of “biases” in binary outcome models. Rev Econ Stat. 2008; 90(3): 406‐ 413.
- [6]Allison PD. Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups. Soc Methods Res. 1999; 28(2): 186‐ 208.
- [7]Mood C. Logistic regression: why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. Europ Soc Rev. 2010; 26(1): 67‐ 82.
- [8]Norton EC, Dowd BE, Maciejewski ML. Marginal effects—quantifying the effect of changes in risk factors in logistic regression models. JAMA. 2019; 321(13): 1304‐ 1305. 30848814
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Electronic health record usability, satisfaction, and burnout for family physicians.
Holmgren, A. J., Hendrix, N., Maisel, N., Everson, J., Bazemore, A., Rotenstein, L., Phillips, R. L., & Adler-Milstein, J. (2024) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.26956 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Adequate Care Coordination is Associated with Reduced Unmet Mental Health Needs for Children
Graaf, G., Gigli, K., Hughes, P., & Thomas, K. C. (2026) · Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal · doi:10.1007/s10560-026-01101-w
- Authors
- Norton, E. C., Dowd, B. E., Garrido, M. M., & Maciejewski, M. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Norton, Edward C.
- Venue
- Health Services Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-06
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e14337-e14337
- ISSN
- 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-6773
- PMC
- PMC11250151
- OpenAlex
- W4399260819
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 6
- FWCI
- 16.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (RCS 10‐391)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Keywords
- odds ratio, marginal effects, logistic regression, binary outcomes, reporting guidelines, case-control study, effect size interpretation
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
