Misuse of multinomial logistic regression in stroke related health research: A systematic review of methodology
- PMID: 37442794
- DOI: 10.1111/ejn.16084
Misuse of multinomial logistic regression in stroke related health research: A systematic review of methodology
Abstract
Multinomial logistic regression (MLR) is often used to model the association between a nominal outcome variable and one or more covariates. The results of MLR are interpreted as relative risk ratios (RRR) and warrant a more coherent interpretation than ordinary logistic regression. Some authors compare the results of MLR to ordinal logistic regression (OLR), irrespective of the fact that these estimate different quantities. We aim to investigate the time trends in the use and misuse of MLR in studies including stroke patients, specifically the extent to which (1) the results are denoted as anything other than RRR, (2) comparisons are made of results with results of OLR and (3) results have been interpreted coherently. Secondarily, we examine the use of model validation techniques in studies with predictive aims. We searched EMBASE and PubMed for articles using MLR on populations of stroke patients. Identified studies were screened, and information pertaining to our aims was extracted. A total of 285 articles were identified through a systematic literature search, and 68 of these were included in the review. Of these, 60 articles (88%) did not denote exponentiated coefficients of MLR as relative risk ratios but rather some other measure. Additionally, 63 articles (93%) interpreted the results of MLR in a non-coherent manner. Two articles attempted to compare MLR results with those of OLR. Nine studies attempted to use MLR for predictive means, and three used relevant validation techniques. From these findings, it is clear that the interpretation of MLR is often suboptimal.
Keywords: interpretation; modelling; odds ratio; relative risk ratio; risk ratio.
© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Neuroscience published by Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Agresti, A. (2013). Categorical data analysis (third). John Wiley & Sons Incorporated.
-
- Altman, D. G., Vergouwe, Y., Royston, P., & Moons, K. G. M. (2009). Prognosis and prognostic research: Validating a prognostic model. BMJ, 338(may28 1), b605. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b605
-
- Anagnostou, E., Koutsoudaki, P., Tountopoulou, A., Spengos, K., & Vassilopoulou, S. (2020). Bedside assessment of vergence in stroke patients. Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology, 41(4), 424-430. https://doi.org/10.1097/wno.0000000000001035
-
- Béjot, Y., Guilloteau, A., Joux, J., Lannuzel, A., Mimeau, E., Mislin-Tritsch, C., Fournel, I., Bonithon-Kopp, C., & the INDIA Study Group. (2017). Social deprivation and stroke severity on admission: A French cohort study in Burgundy and the West Indies-Guyana region. European Journal of Neurology, 24(5), 694-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13271
-
- Boesgaard Graversen, C., Brink Valentin, J., Lytken Larsen, M., Riahi, S., Holmberg, T., & Paaske Johnsen, S. (2021). Non-persistence with medication as a mediator for the social inequality in risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with incident acute coronary syndrome: A nationwide cohort study. Clinical Epidemiology, 13, 1071-1083. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S335133
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
