Literature DB >> 9027513

Basic methods for sensitivity analysis of biases.

S Greenland1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most discussions of statistical methods focus on accounting for measured confounders and random errors in the data-generating process. In observational epidemiology, however, controllable confounding and random error are sometimes only a fraction of the total error, and are rarely if ever the only important source of uncertainty. Potential biases due to unmeasured confounders, classification errors, and selection bias need to be addressed in any thorough discussion of study results.
METHODS: This paper reviews basic methods for examining the sensitivity of study results to biases, with a focus on methods that can be implemented without computer programming.
CONCLUSION: Sensitivity analysis is helpful in obtaining a realistic picture of the potential impact of biases.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9027513

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  149 in total

1.  Residual confounding after adjustment for age: a minor issue in breast cancer screening effectiveness.

Authors:  Guido van Schoor; Ellen Paap; Mireille J M Broeders; André L M Verbeek
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 8.082

Review 2.  Psychosocial factors and public health: a suitable case for treatment?

Authors:  J Macleod; G Davey Smith
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Bias.

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

4.  Knee pain and driving duration: a secondary analysis of the Taxi Drivers' Health Study.

Authors:  Jiu-Chiaun Chen; Jack T Dennerlein; Tung-Sheng Shih; Chiou-Jong Chen; Yawen Cheng; Wushou P Chang; Louise M Ryan; David C Christiani
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Sensitivity plots for confounder bias in the single mediator model.

Authors:  Matthew G Cox; Yasemin Kisbu-Sakarya; Milica Miočević; David P MacKinnon
Journal:  Eval Rev       Date:  2014-03-28

6.  Associations between HIV infection and subclinical coronary atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Wendy S Post; Matthew Budoff; Lawrence Kingsley; Frank J Palella; Mallory D Witt; Xiuhong Li; Richard T George; Todd T Brown; Lisa P Jacobson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Paternal occupational exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and risk of adverse pregnancy outcome.

Authors:  Geir Mjøen; Dag Ottar Saetre; Rolv T Lie; Tore Tynes; Karl Gerhard Blaasaas; Merete Hannevik; Lorentz M Irgens
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-07-21       Impact factor: 8.082

8.  Reproducibility of the past year and historical self-administered total physical activity questionnaire among older women.

Authors:  Nicola Orsini; Rino Bellocco; Matteo Bottai; Marcello Pagano; Alicja Wolk
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-02-28       Impact factor: 8.082

9.  Health state information derived from secondary databases is affected by multiple sources of bias.

Authors:  Darcey D Terris; David G Litaker; Siran M Koroukian
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-04-08       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  STRATOS guidance document on measurement error and misclassification of variables in observational epidemiology: Part 2-More complex methods of adjustment and advanced topics.

Authors:  Pamela A Shaw; Paul Gustafson; Raymond J Carroll; Veronika Deffner; Kevin W Dodd; Ruth H Keogh; Victor Kipnis; Janet A Tooze; Michael P Wallace; Helmut Küchenhoff; Laurence S Freedman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.