Abstract
The hazard ratio is a measure of effect which is of paramount importance in etiological research, that is in studies aimed at assessing the strength of the causal relationship between a given treatment/exposure and a certain outcome. Despite the widespread use of the hazard ratio as a measure of effect in scientific reports and articles, the interpretation of this index is often accompanied by some misconceptions which can jeopardize the critical appraisal of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies as well. Herein, using a series of examples derived from RCTs in the elderly subjects, we address major pitfalls regarding the interpretation of the hazard ratio in geriatric research.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Stel VS, Zoccali C, Dekker FW et al (2009) The randomized controlled trial. Nephron Clin Pract 113:c337–c342
Tripepi G, Torino C, D’Arrigo G et al (2012) An overview of standard statistical methods for assessing exposure-outcome link in survival analysis (Part I): basic concepts. Aging Clin Exp Res 24:109–112
Hernan MA (2010) The hazards of hazard ratios. Epidemiology 21:13–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c1ea43
Stel VS, Dekker FW, Tripepi G et al (2011) Survival analysis II: Cox regression. Nephron Clin Pract 119:c255–c260
McNeil JJ, Nelson MR, Woods RL et al (2018) Effect of aspirin on all-cause mortality in the healthy elderly. N Engl J Med 379:1519–1528. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1803955
Manjunath G, Tighiouart H, Coresh J et al (2003) Level of kidney function as a risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes in the elderly. Kidney Int 63:1121–1129. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.2003.00838.x
Funding
No author has to disclose any conflict of interest that could have direct or potential influence or impart bias on the work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
SR, GD and GT contributed to the study conception and design. The first draft of the manuscript was written by SR, and GT. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Human and animal rights statement
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roumeliotis, S., D’Arrigo, G. & Tripepi, G. The hazard ratio as a measure of effect in clinical trials of elderly populations: common pitfalls and misconceptions. Aging Clin Exp Res 33, 505–511 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-020-01538-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-020-01538-8