Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy

Treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials are often reported in the media and medical journals as the relative risk reduction. The present article explains why the relative risk reduction is a misinformative measure that promotes disinformation when reporting efficacy in clinical research st...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ronald B. Brown
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2022-12-01
Series:Dialogues in Health
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772653322000740
_version_ 1811178596650188800
author Ronald B. Brown
author_facet Ronald B. Brown
author_sort Ronald B. Brown
collection DOAJ
description Treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials are often reported in the media and medical journals as the relative risk reduction. The present article explains why the relative risk reduction is a misinformative measure that promotes disinformation when reporting efficacy in clinical research studies such as randomized controlled trials for COVID-19 vaccines. The relative risk reduction is based on the relative risk, a proportional measure or ratio used in epidemiologic studies to estimate the probability of a disease associated with an exposure. The present article demonstrates how the relative risk reduction and relative risk obscure the magnitude of disease risk reduction in clinical research. The absolute risk reduction is shown to be a more precise and reliable measure of treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical research studies. The absolute risk reduction reciprocal also measures the number needed to treat or vaccinate, and is a more accurate measure than the relative risk reduction for comparing risk reductions of clinical studies. Additionally, the present article reviews consequences of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy misinformation disseminated through media reports. The article concludes that relative risk reduction should not be used to measure treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials. What is new?: • Unreliability of relative measures in clinical trials is graphically illustrated, demonstrating constant relative measures as absolute measures change. • Misuse of relative measures in clinical research is historically linked to misinterpretation of Jerome Cornfield’s advice on measuring causative and associative effects. • Consequences of disinformation and misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and modern clinical medicine are described. • The proper use of absolute measures in meta-analyses is explained.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T06:21:06Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c99dd503bef74307aa76a67b2ce946ee
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2772-6533
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T06:21:06Z
publishDate 2022-12-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Dialogues in Health
spelling doaj.art-c99dd503bef74307aa76a67b2ce946ee2022-12-22T04:40:34ZengElsevierDialogues in Health2772-65332022-12-011100074Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacyRonald B. Brown0School of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, CanadaTreatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials are often reported in the media and medical journals as the relative risk reduction. The present article explains why the relative risk reduction is a misinformative measure that promotes disinformation when reporting efficacy in clinical research studies such as randomized controlled trials for COVID-19 vaccines. The relative risk reduction is based on the relative risk, a proportional measure or ratio used in epidemiologic studies to estimate the probability of a disease associated with an exposure. The present article demonstrates how the relative risk reduction and relative risk obscure the magnitude of disease risk reduction in clinical research. The absolute risk reduction is shown to be a more precise and reliable measure of treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical research studies. The absolute risk reduction reciprocal also measures the number needed to treat or vaccinate, and is a more accurate measure than the relative risk reduction for comparing risk reductions of clinical studies. Additionally, the present article reviews consequences of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy misinformation disseminated through media reports. The article concludes that relative risk reduction should not be used to measure treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials. What is new?: • Unreliability of relative measures in clinical trials is graphically illustrated, demonstrating constant relative measures as absolute measures change. • Misuse of relative measures in clinical research is historically linked to misinterpretation of Jerome Cornfield’s advice on measuring causative and associative effects. • Consequences of disinformation and misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and modern clinical medicine are described. • The proper use of absolute measures in meta-analyses is explained.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772653322000740Relative risk reductionRelative riskAbsolute risk reductionNumber needed to treatNumber needed to vaccinateCOVID-19 vaccines
spellingShingle Ronald B. Brown
Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
Dialogues in Health
Relative risk reduction
Relative risk
Absolute risk reduction
Number needed to treat
Number needed to vaccinate
COVID-19 vaccines
title Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
title_full Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
title_fullStr Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
title_full_unstemmed Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
title_short Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy
title_sort relative risk reduction misinformative measure in clinical trials and covid 19 vaccine efficacy
topic Relative risk reduction
Relative risk
Absolute risk reduction
Number needed to treat
Number needed to vaccinate
COVID-19 vaccines
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772653322000740
work_keys_str_mv AT ronaldbbrown relativeriskreductionmisinformativemeasureinclinicaltrialsandcovid19vaccineefficacy