American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on July 13, 2005
American Journal of Epidemiology 2005 162(5):415-418; doi:10.1093/aje/kwi224
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
American Journal of Epidemiology Copyright © 2005 by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health All rights reserved
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS |
Invited Commentary: How Far Can Epidemiologists Get with Statistical Adjustment?
1 Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA
2 Department of Statistics, University of California, Berkeley, CA
Correspondence to Dr. Diana B. Petitti, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 393 E. Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA 91188 (e-mail: diana.b.petitti@kp.org).
Received for publication March 22, 2005. Accepted for publication April 29, 2005.
Abbreviations: WHI, Women's Health Initiative
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
 |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
In 2002, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) clinical trial reported that combined estrogen-plus-progestin hormone therapy did not prevent coronary heart disease in women (1
). Combined estrogen-plus-progestin therapy increased the risk of stroke by a factor of 1.4 on average and doubled the risk of venous thromboembolism.
Observational research up to the time of the WHI suggested that the relative risk of coronary heart disease was 0.50–0.65 in hormone users compared with nonusers (2, 3). Based on observational research, the relative risk of stroke was considered less than or near 1.0 for hormone therapy (2). Both observational studies (4) and a randomized trial, the Heart Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS) (5), showed a relative risk of 1–2 for venous thromboembolism in hormone users.
The
|
TRADITIONAL CONFOUNDERS |
|---|
|
TIME COURSE OF EXPOSURE |
|---|
|
FURTHER INFORMATION ON STROKE AND CONCERN ABOUT DEMENTIA |
|---|
|
CONCLUSION |
|---|
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Van der Niepen, A. Woestenburg, H. Brie, S. Vancayzeele, K. MacDonald, K. Denhaerynck, C. Lee, C. Hermans, and I. Abraham Effectiveness of Valsartan for Treatment of Hypertension: Patient Profiling and Hierarchical Modeling of Determinants and Outcomes (the PREVIEW Study) Ann. Pharmacother., May 1, 2009; 43(5): 849 - 861. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. McPherson Do patients' preferences matter? BMJ, October 31, 2008; 337(oct31_1): a2034 - a2034. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M.-N. Vercambre, A. Fournier, M.-C. Boutron-Ruault, F. Clavel-Chapelon, V. Ringa, and C. Berr Differential Dietary Nutrient Intake according to Hormone Replacement Therapy Use: An Underestimated Confounding Factor in Epidemiologic Studies? Am. J. Epidemiol., December 15, 2007; 166(12): 1451 - 1460. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Tatsioni, N. G. Bonitsis, and J. P. A. Ioannidis Persistence of Contradicted Claims in the Literature JAMA, December 5, 2007; 298(21): 2517 - 2526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Prentice, R. Langer, G. Anderson, and D. Barad Prentice et al. Respond to "How Far Can Epidemiologists Get with Statistical Adjustment?" Am. J. Epidemiol., September 1, 2005; 162(5): 419 - 420. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|