Literature DB >> 24187429

Can efficiency be gained by correcting for misclassification?

Molin Wang1, Xiaomei Liao, Donna Spiegelman.   

Abstract

This paper considers 2×2 tables arising from case-control studies in which the binary exposure may be misclassified. We found circumstances under which the inverse matrix method provides a more efficient odds ratio estimator than the naive estimator. We provide some intuition for the findings, and also provide a formula for obtaining the minimum size of a validation study such that the variance of the odds ratio estimator from the inverse matrix method is smaller than that of the naive estimator, thereby ensuring an advantage for the misclassification corrected result. As a corollary of this result, we show that correcting for misclassification does not necessarily lead to a widening of the confidence intervals, but, rather, in addition to producing a consistent estimate, can also produce one that is more efficient.

Entities:  

Keywords:  2×2 table; Case control study; Misclassification; Odds ratio; Validation study design

Year:  2013        PMID: 24187429      PMCID: PMC3810993          DOI: 10.1016/j.jspi.2013.06.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stat Plan Inference        ISSN: 0378-3758            Impact factor:   1.111


  11 in total

1.  A note on estimating crude odds ratios in case-control studies with differentially misclassified exposure.

Authors:  Robert H Lyles
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Validation study methods for estimating exposure proportions and odds ratios with misclassified data.

Authors:  R J Marshall
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Accounting for independent nondifferential misclassification does not increase certainty that an observed association is in the correct direction.

Authors:  Sander Greenland; Paul Gustafson
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-04-26       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for measurement error: the case of multiple covariates measured with error.

Authors:  B Rosner; D Spiegelman; W C Willett
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  The effects of misclassification on the estimation of relative risk.

Authors:  B A Barron
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Variance estimation for epidemiologic effect estimates under misclassification.

Authors:  S Greenland
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Effects of mismodelling and mismeasuring explanatory variables on tests of their association with a response variable.

Authors:  S W Lagakos
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1988 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for systematic within-person measurement error.

Authors:  B Rosner; W C Willett; D Spiegelman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Statistical uncertainty due to misclassification: implications for validation substudies.

Authors:  S Greenland
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Recall bias in a case-control study of sudden infant death syndrome.

Authors:  C D Drews; J F Kraus; S Greenland
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 7.196

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.