Methods for estimating prevalence ratios in cross-sectional studies

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objective To empirically compare the Cox, log-binomial, Poisson and logistic regressions to obtain estimates of prevalence ratios (PR) in cross-sectional studies. Methods Data from a population-based cross-sectional epidemiological study (n = 2072) on elderly people in Sao Paulo (Southeastern Brazil), conducted between May 2003 and April 2005, were used. Diagnoses of dementia, possible cases of common mental disorders and self-rated poor health were chosen as outcomes with low, intermediate and high prevalence, respectively. Confounding variables with two or more categories or continuous values were used. Reference values for point and interval estimates of prevalence ratio (PR) were obtained by means of the Mantel-Haenszel stratification method. Adjusted PR estimates were calculated using Cox and Poisson regressions with robust variance, and using log-binomial regression. Crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were obtained using logistic regression. Results The point and interval estimates obtained using Cox and Poisson regressions were very similar to those obtained using Mantel-Haenszel stratification, independent of the outcome prevalence and the covariates in the model. The log-binomial model presented convergence difficulties when the outcome had high prevalence and there was a continuous covariate in the model. Logistic regression produced point and interval estimates that were higher than those obtained using the other methods, particularly when for outcomes with high initial prevalence. If interpreted as PR estimates, the ORs would overestimate the associations for outcomes with low, intermediate and high prevalence by 13%, almost by 100% and fourfold, respectively. Conclusions In analyses of data from cross-sectional studies, the Cox and Poisson models with robust variance are better alternatives than logistic regression is. The log-binomial regression model produces unbiased PR estimates, but may present convergence difficulties when the outcome is very prevalent and the confounding variable is continuous.

Key findings

• Results The point and interval estimates obtained using Cox and Poisson regressions were very similar to those obtained using Mantel-Haenszel stratification, independent of the outcome prevalence and the covariates in the model.

Why it matters

This methods study compared statistical approaches for estimating prevalence ratios in cross-sectional studies, using dementia as one outcome. It found that Cox and Poisson regressions produced estimates very similar to Mantel-Haenszel stratification, while logistic regression produced different estimates.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →

Study details

• Study designcross-sectional
• Participants2,072
• Evidence strengthLow

Read the original

• DOI: 10.1590/s0034-89102008000600003
• PubMed: 19009156
• Original source →
• Free full text: Revista de Saúde Pública →

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

@article{coutinho2008-19009156,
  author  = {Coutinho, L. M. and Scazufca, M. and Menezes, P. R.},
  title   = {{Methods for estimating prevalence ratios in cross-sectional studies}},
  journal = {Revista de saude publica},
  year    = {2008},
  doi     = {10.1590/s0034-89102008000600003},
  pmid    = {19009156},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1590/s0034-89102008000600003}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

• Dementia diagnosis in developing countries: a cross-cultural validation study Lancet (London, England) · 2003-03-01 · usefulness score 60/100 · Getting a diagnosis

Related studies in How common it is

• Prevalence of mental disorders in China: a cross-sectional epidemiological study The lancet. Psychiatry · 2019-02-18 · usefulness score 58/100
• Relation of cerebral vessel disease to Alzheimer's disease dementia and cognitive function in elderly people: a cross-sectional study The Lancet. Neurology · 2016-06-14 · usefulness score 69/100
• Normative estimates of cross-sectional and longitudinal brain volume decline in aging and AD Neurology · 2005-03-01 · usefulness score 67/100
• Canadian study of health and aging: study methods and prevalence of dementia CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 1994-03-01 · usefulness score 48/100
• Estimating the impact of risk factor reduction on dementia prevalence in New Zealand Alzheimer s & Dementia · 2025-07-01 · usefulness score 42/100
• Association of low plasma Abeta42/Abeta40 ratios with increased imminent risk for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease Archives of neurology · 2007-03-01 · usefulness score 57/100

Similar studies

• The changing prevalence of comorbidity across the age spectrum 2008 · Risk factors
• Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis 2002 · How common it is
• A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk 1999 · How common it is
• Critical appraisal of the health research literature: prevalence or incidence of a health problem 1998 · How common it is
• A Comparison of the Prevalence of Dementia in the United States in 2000 and 2012 2017 · How common it is
• The changing prevalence and incidence of dementia over time - current evidence 2017 · How common it is

More on How common it is

• A review that covers this ground Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study Lancet (London, England) · 2005-12-01 · usefulness score 79/100
• Newest in this subject Selective vulnerability of human basal forebrain subsystems in ageing and neuropsychiatric disorders medRxiv · 2026-10-15 · Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed · usefulness score 16/100
• Newest in this subject Enhancing Neurodegeneration Awareness and Care for the Elderly in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, and Qatar: Challenges, Policy Gaps, and Future Directions Preprints.org · 2026-10-13 · Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed · usefulness score 16/100

See all studies in How common it is →