Skip to main content
Log in

Reconsidering the denominator of the attributable proportion for interaction

  • COMMENTARY
  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Walker AM. Concepts of interaction. Am J Epidemiol. 1980;112(4):467–470.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  3. VanderWeele TJ, Knol MJ. A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiol Methods (in press).

  4. Rothman KJ. Causes. Am J Epidemiol. 1976;104:587–592.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. VanderWeele TJ. Sufficient cause interactions and statistical interactions. Epidemiology. 2009;20(1):6–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rothman KJ. Modern epidemiology. 1st ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Company; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Confidence interval estimation of interaction. Epidemiology. 1992;3(5):452–456.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lundberg M, Fredlund P, Hallqvist J, Diderichsen F. A SAS program calculating three measures of interaction with confidence intervals.

  9. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. A weighting approach to causal effects and additive interaction in case–control studies: marginal structural linear odds models. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174:1197–1203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: an introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Knol MJ, VanderWeele TJ, Groenwold RHH, Klungel OH, Rovers MM, Grobbee DE. Estimating measures of interaction on an additive scale for preventive exposures. Eur J Epidemiol. 2011;26:433–438.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Skrondal A. Interaction as departure from additivity in case–control studies: a cautionary note. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158(3):251–258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tyler J. VanderWeele.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

PDF (53 KB)

Appendices

Appendix 1: Invariance to recoding the outcome

Here we show that the alternative definition of the attributable proportion, \(AP^{\ast}=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}-1}, \) is invariant to the recoding of the outcome, whereas Rothman’s primary definition, \(AP^{\ast }=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}}, \) is not. The definition of the alternative attributable proportion is [6]:

$$ AP^{\ast }=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}-1}=\frac{RR_{11}-RR_{10}-RR_{01}+1}{RR_{11}-1} =\frac{\frac{p_{11}}{p_{00}}-\frac{p_{10}}{p_{00}}-\frac{p_{01}}{p_{00}}+1}{ \frac{p_{11}}{p_{00}}-1}=\frac{(p_{11}-p_{10}-p_{01}+p_{00})}{p_{11}-p_{00}}. $$

If we reverse the coding of the outcome, the relative risks for the categories (X 1 = 1, X 2 = 1),  (X 1 = 1, X 2 = 0),  (X 1 = 0, X 2 = 1) become respectively \(\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}},\,\frac{1-p_{10}}{1-p_{00}}\), and \(\frac{1-p_{01}}{1-p_{00}}, \) and the alternative attributable proportion measure is then

$$ \begin{aligned} AP^{\ast}&=\frac{\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}}-\frac{1-p_{10}}{1-p_{00}}- \frac{1-p_{01}}{1-p_{00}}+1}{\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}}-1}=\frac{ (1-p_{11})-(1-p_{10})-(1-p_{01})+(1-p_{00})}{(1-p_{11})-(1-p_{00})}\\ &=\frac{(p_{11}-p_{10}-p_{01}+p_{00})}{p_{11}-p_{00}} \\ \end{aligned} $$

which is the same measure we obtained under the original coding of the outcome.

For Rothman’s primary definition of the attributable proportion, \(AP=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}}\), under the original coding we have that this is

$$ AP=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}}=\frac{RR_{11}-RR_{10}-RR_{01}+1}{RR_{11}}=\frac{ \frac{p_{11}}{p_{00}}-\frac{p_{10}}{p_{00}}-\frac{p_{01}}{p_{00}}+1}{\frac{ p_{11}}{p_{00}}}=\frac{(p_{11}-p_{10}-p_{01}+p_{00})}{p_{11}}. $$

If we reverse the coding of the outcome, the relative risks for the categories (X 1 = 1, X 2 = 1),  (X 1 = 1, X 2 = 0),  (X 1 = 0, X 2 = 1) become respectively \(\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}},\) \(\frac{1-p_{10}}{1-p_{00}}\), and \(\frac{1-p_{01}}{1-p_{00}},\) and Rothman’s primary attributable proportion measure is then

$$ \begin{aligned} AP&=\frac{\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}}-\frac{1-p_{10}}{1-p_{00}}-\frac{ 1-p_{01}}{1-p_{00}}+1}{\frac{1-p_{11}}{1-p_{00}}}=\frac{ (1-p_{11})-(1-p_{10})-(1-p_{01})+(1-p_{00})}{(1-p_{11})} \\ &=\frac{-(p_{11}-p_{10}-p_{01}+p_{00})}{1-p_{11}} \end{aligned} $$

so that the measure reverses sign and is of a very different magnitude.

Appendix 2: SAS and Stata code to implement the alternative attributable proportion measure

Suppose the outcome is in variable ‘d’, the first exposure in variable ‘g’ and the second exposure in variable ‘e’ with three covariates ‘c1 c2 c3’. The following SAS code will estimate the alternative attributable proportion measure, \(AP^{\ast }=\frac{RERI}{RR_{11}-1}, \) and its confidence interval using the delta method (see Online Appendix):

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

VanderWeele, T.J. Reconsidering the denominator of the attributable proportion for interaction. Eur J Epidemiol 28, 779–784 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9843-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9843-6

Keywords

Navigation