Literature DB >> 8433115

Bias due to non-differential misclassification of polytomous confounders.

H Brenner1.   

Abstract

This paper addresses potential effects of non-differential misclassification of polytomous confounders on adjusted exposure-disease associations. Although the degree of confounder-misclassification bias heavily depends on the relative distribution of the confounding variable among the compared exposure groups and the misclassification pattern, in most cases the bias is in the same direction (though to a lesser degree) than the confounding, i.e. the observed adjusted measures lie between the crude and the fully adjusted measures. In some instances, however, the confounder misclassification bias may be in the opposite direction. This is in contrast to previous understanding that non-differential confounder misclassification always tends to bias adjusted effect estimates towards the crude estimates and that the extent of this bias has a stable relationship to the degree of misclassification. Consequently, conclusions on the potential effects of non-differential misclassification of a polytomous confounder in any given study should only be made after careful sensitivity analyses which consider plausible ranges of misclassification rates.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8433115     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90009-p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  14 in total

1.  Bias.

Authors:  Miguel Delgado-Rodríguez; Javier Llorca
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  Impact of measurement error in the study of sexually transmitted infections.

Authors:  L Myer; C Morroni; B G Link
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.519

3.  Theorems, proofs, examples, and rules in the practice of epidemiology.

Authors:  Tyler J Vanderweele; Elizabeth L Ogburnb
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Bias attenuation results for nondifferentially mismeasured ordinal and coarsened confounders.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Ogburn; Tyler J Vanderweele
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.445

5.  A new criterion for confounder selection.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Ilya Shpitser
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  On the nondifferential misclassification of a binary confounder.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Ogburn; Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  Misclassification in administrative claims data: quantifying the impact on treatment effect estimates.

Authors:  Michele Jonsson Funk; Suzanne N Landi
Journal:  Curr Epidemiol Rep       Date:  2014-12

8.  Risk of severe life threatening asthma and beta agonist type: an example of confounding by severity.

Authors:  J E Garrett; S F Lanes; J Kolbe; H H Rea
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 9.  Hypertension in hemodialysis patients: an opinion-based update.

Authors:  Tariq Shafi; Sana Waheed; Philip G Zager
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.455

10.  Combining directed acyclic graphs and the change-in-estimate procedure as a novel approach to adjustment-variable selection in epidemiology.

Authors:  David Evans; Basile Chaix; Thierry Lobbedez; Christian Verger; Antoine Flahault
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.