Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FLANDERS, W D.
Right arrow Articles by KLEINBAUM, D. G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FLANDERS, W D.
Right arrow Articles by KLEINBAUM, D. G
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1995 Oxford University Press

research-article

Basic Models for Disease Occurrence in Epidemiology

W DANA FLANDERS and DAVID G KLEINBAUM

Emory University School of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology 1599 Clifton Rd, NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA

Background. One of the epidemiologist's most basic tasks is estimation of disease occurrence. To perform this task, the epidemiologist frequently models variability in disease occurrence using one of three distributions—the binomial, the Poisson or the exponential distribution. Although epidemiologists often use them and their properties appear in standard texts, we know of no text or review that compares and contrasts epidemiological application of these distributions.

Methods. In this commentary, we discuss these three basic distributions. We note key assumptions as well as limitations, and compare results from analyses based on each distribution.

Results and Conclusions. We illustrate that the three distributions, although superficially different, often lead to similar results. We argue that epidemiologists should often obtain similar results regardless of which distribution they use. We also point out that application of all three distributions can be inappropriate if assumptions of independence or homogeneity of risks fail to hold. Finally, we briefly review how these basic distributions can be used to justify use of other distributions, such as the Gaussian distribution, for studying disease-exposure associations.

Received 1 July 1994


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
R. Roman, M. Comas, L. Hoffmeister, and X. Castells
Determining the lifetime density function using a continuous approach
J Epidemiol Community Health, October 1, 2007; 61(10): 923 - 925.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
L. G. Spector, Y. Xie, L. L. Robison, N. A. Heerema, J. M. Hilden, B. Lange, C. A. Felix, S. M. Davies, J. Slavin, J. D. Potter, et al.
Maternal Diet and Infant Leukemia: The DNA Topoisomerase II Inhibitor Hypothesis: A Report from the Children's Oncology Group
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2005; 14(3): 651 - 655.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Inj. Prev.Home page
M. Stevenson, H. Iredell, P. Howat, D. Cross, and M. Hall
Measuring community/environmental interventions: the Child Pedestrian Injury Prevention Project
Inj. Prev., March 1, 1999; 5(1): 26 - 30.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NeurologyHome page
A. F. Jorm and D. Jolley
The incidence of dementia: A meta-analysis
Neurology, September 1, 1998; 51(3): 728 - 733.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.