OBJECTIVES: We explore how misclassification in disease status can distort the exposure-disease association in a study with dichotomous disease and exposure status. METHODS: We define the difference in population odds ratios between populations with and without disease misclassification as population-level bias and derive the bias as a function of sensitivity and specificity for observed disease status. The magnitude and direction of bias can be elucidated through analytic derivations, as illustrated with numerical examples. RESULTS: Patterns of bias exist not only for nondifferential misclassification but also for some differential misclassification scenarios. We have provided conditions defined in terms of sensitivity and specificity that correspond to each pattern of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Caution is needed in interpreting results when misclassification is present. Our findings can be used to assess the effects of disease misclassification in a population when sensitivity and specificity are known or can be estimated.
OBJECTIVES: We explore how misclassification in disease status can distort the exposure-disease association in a study with dichotomous disease and exposure status. METHODS: We define the difference in population odds ratios between populations with and without disease misclassification as population-level bias and derive the bias as a function of sensitivity and specificity for observed disease status. The magnitude and direction of bias can be elucidated through analytic derivations, as illustrated with numerical examples. RESULTS: Patterns of bias exist not only for nondifferential misclassification but also for some differential misclassification scenarios. We have provided conditions defined in terms of sensitivity and specificity that correspond to each pattern of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Caution is needed in interpreting results when misclassification is present. Our findings can be used to assess the effects of disease misclassification in a population when sensitivity and specificity are known or can be estimated.
Authors: Robert H Lyles; Li Tang; Hillary M Superak; Caroline C King; David D Celentano; Yungtai Lo; Jack D Sobel Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Elsaline Rijkse; Hongchao Qi; Shabnam Babakry; Diederik C Bijdevaate; Hendrikus J A N Kimenai; Joke I Roodnat; Jan N M IJzermans; Robert C Minnee Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2021-09-12 Impact factor: 3.842
Authors: Dina Goodman; Mary E Crocker; Farhan Pervaiz; Eric D McCollum; Kyle Steenland; Suzanne M Simkovich; Catherine H Miele; Laura L Hammitt; Phabiola Herrera; Heather J Zar; Harry Campbell; Claudio F Lanata; John P McCracken; Lisa M Thompson; Ghislaine Rosa; Miles A Kirby; Sarada Garg; Gurusamy Thangavel; Vijayalakshmi Thanasekaraan; Kalpana Balakrishnan; Carina King; Thomas Clasen; William Checkley Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Suzanne M Simkovich; Lindsay J Underhill; Miles A Kirby; Dina Goodman; Mary E Crocker; Shakir Hossen; John P McCracken; Oscar de León; Lisa M Thompson; Sarada S Garg; Kalpana Balakrishnan; Gurusamy Thangavel; Ghislaine Rosa; Jennifer L Peel; Thomas F Clasen; Eric D McCollum; William Checkley Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2020-03-23
Authors: Hayley R Ashbaugh; James D Cherry; Nicole A Hoff; Reena H Doshi; Vivian H Alfonso; Adva Gadoth; Patrick Mukadi; Stephen G Higgins; Roger Budd; Christina Randall; Emile Okitolonda-Wemakoy; Jean Jacques Muyembe-Tamfum; Sue K Gerber; Anne W Rimoin Journal: J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc Date: 2019-12-27 Impact factor: 3.164