The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for dementia were significantly inversely associated with increased daily or total equivalent statin dosage. The HRs for the three tertiles of mean equivalent daily dosage (lowest to highest) were 0.622, 0.697 and 0.419 vs control (p<0.001 for trend). The HRs for the three tertiles of total equivalent dosage (lowest to highest) were 0.773, 0.632 and 0.332 vs control (p<0.001 for trend).
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
-
4$\begingroup$ You might find some of our posts on hazard ratios to be helpful. $\endgroup$– whuber ♦Apr 21, 2015 at 19:52
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
3
The HRs for the three tertiles of mean equivalent daily dosage (lowest to highest) were 0.622, 0.697 and 0.419 vs control (p<0.001 for trend).
$HR=\frac{changed~hazard}{control~hazard}$ It means that increased daily statin dosage Change Hazard compare to Control Hazard.
After lowest daily statin dosage, Hazard will be reduced to 62.2% of control hazard.
After average dosage, 69.7%
After highest dosage, 41.9%
The HRs for the three tertiles of total equivalent dosage (lowest to highest) were 0.773, 0.632 and 0.332 vs control (p<0.001 for trend).
Same way to interpret.
-
$\begingroup$ Thank you! My confusion is that if the findings were dose dependent the 41.9 % reduction in hazard or dementia diagnosis seems to be less of a benefit than the lowest turtle of 62.2% reduction. Am I looking at this correctly? $\endgroup$ Apr 22, 2015 at 21:08
-
1$\begingroup$ @BonnyPMcClain Not 41.9% reduction, you'd say hazard reduced to 41.9%....... Then you see highest dosage decrease hazard. $\endgroup$ Apr 22, 2015 at 21:12
-
$\begingroup$ Ahhhh. Thanks! I had a mental block so I appreciate your clarification. $\endgroup$ Apr 22, 2015 at 21:25