Our error in putting adjusted RRs in the crude formula has been referred to as ‘ Probably the most common error ... ’ associated with PAF

@inproceedings{2010OurEI,
  title={Our error in putting adjusted RRs in the crude formula has been referred to as ‘ Probably the most common error ... ’ associated with PAF},
  author={},
  year={2010}
}
  • Published 2010
Unfortunately, we got the wrong answer. The correct answer is 21%; we over-estimated the PAF by nearly 30%. What did we do wrong? We followed a wellestablished, but incorrect, tradition of putting adjusted RRs in the crude (unadjusted) PAF formula. The crude formula is only appropriate when the impact of exposure (i.e. ‡ 5 kg gain) on the development of… CONTINUE READING