Abstract
What is already known on this topic:
⇒ The risk ratio (relative risk) is a ratio of two risks that is interpreted
as connecting the intervention conditional risks in a clinical trial.
What this study adds:
⇒ It is demonstrated that the conventional interpretation of the risk ratio is in conflict with Bayes’ theorem.
⇒ The interpretation of the risk ratio as a likelihood ratio connecting prior
(unconditional) intervention risk to outcome conditional intervention risk is required to avoid conflict with Bayes’ theorem.
How this study might affect research, practice or policy:
⇒ The interpretation of the risk ratio as an effect measure in a clinical trial
is naïve and better replaced by its interpretation as a likelihood ratio.
⇒ The ratio of the complementary risk ratio's (or likelihood ratio's) is what
should actually be interpreted as an effect measure connecting the
intervention conditional risks in a clinical trial.
⇒ The risk ratio (relative risk) is a ratio of two risks that is interpreted
as connecting the intervention conditional risks in a clinical trial.
What this study adds:
⇒ It is demonstrated that the conventional interpretation of the risk ratio is in conflict with Bayes’ theorem.
⇒ The interpretation of the risk ratio as a likelihood ratio connecting prior
(unconditional) intervention risk to outcome conditional intervention risk is required to avoid conflict with Bayes’ theorem.
How this study might affect research, practice or policy:
⇒ The interpretation of the risk ratio as an effect measure in a clinical trial
is naïve and better replaced by its interpretation as a likelihood ratio.
⇒ The ratio of the complementary risk ratio's (or likelihood ratio's) is what
should actually be interpreted as an effect measure connecting the
intervention conditional risks in a clinical trial.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 11 Aug 2022 |