Literature DB >> 9930084

Effect of measurement error on epidemiological studies of environmental and occupational exposures.

B G Armstrong1.   

Abstract

Random error (misclassification) in exposure measurements usually biases a relative risk, regression coefficient, or other effect measure towards the null value (no association). The most important exception is Berkson type error, which causes little or no bias. Berkson type error arises, in particular, due to use of group average exposure in place of individual values. Random error in exposure measurements, Berkson or otherwise, reduces the power of a study, making it more likely that real associations are not detected. Random error in confounding variables compromises the control of their effect, leaving residual confounding. Random error in a variable that modifies the effect of exposure on health--for example, an indicator of susceptibility--tends to diminish the observed modification of effect, but error in the exposure can create a supurious appearance of modification. Methods are available to correct for bias (but not generally power loss) due to measurement error, if information on the magnitude and type of error is available. These methods can be complicated to use, however, and should be used cautiously as "correction" can magnify confounding if it is present.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9930084      PMCID: PMC1757516          DOI: 10.1136/oem.55.10.651

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Occup Environ Med        ISSN: 1351-0711            Impact factor:   4.402


  5 in total

1.  The effects of measurement errors on relative risk regressions.

Authors:  B G Armstrong
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  A review of the effects of random measurement error on relative risk estimates in epidemiological studies.

Authors:  N H de Klerk; D R English; B K Armstrong
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 7.196

3.  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

Review 4.  Non-differential misclassification of exposure always leads to an underestimate of risk: an incorrect conclusion.

Authors:  T Sorahan; M S Gilthorpe
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 4.402

5.  Non-differential misclassification and bias towards the null: a clarification.

Authors:  S Wacholder; P Hartge; J H Lubin; M Dosemeci
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.402

  5 in total
  198 in total

1.  Effects of measurement strategy and statistical analysis on dose-response relations between physical workload and low back pain.

Authors:  J P Jansen; A Burdorf
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.402

2.  Cross-shift changes in FEV1 in relation to wood dust exposure: the implications of different exposure assessment methods.

Authors:  V Schlünssen; T Sigsgaard; I Schaumburg; H Kromhout
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.402

3.  Work related shoulder disorders: quantitative exposure-response relations with reference to arm posture.

Authors:  S W Svendsen; J P Bonde; S E Mathiassen; K Stengaard-Pedersen; L H Frich
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.402

4.  The impact of exposure categorisation for grouped analyses of cohort data.

Authors:  D B Richardson; D Loomis
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.402

5.  Reliability of near-infrared spectroscopy for measuring forearm and shoulder oxygenation in healthy males and females.

Authors:  Albert G Crenshaw; Guilherme H Elcadi; Fredrik Hellstrom; Svend Erik Mathiassen
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 3.078

6.  Invited commentary: Decomposing with a lot of supposing.

Authors:  Jay S Kaufman
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Healthy worker survivor bias in the Colorado Plateau uranium miners cohort.

Authors:  Alexander P Keil; David B Richardson; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  The two-dimensional Monte Carlo: a new methodologic paradigm for dose reconstruction for epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Steven L Simon; F Owen Hoffman; Eduard Hofer
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 9.  STRATOS guidance document on measurement error and misclassification of variables in observational epidemiology: Part 1-Basic theory and simple methods of adjustment.

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

10.  The delayed effect of wildfire season particulate matter on subsequent influenza season in a mountain west region of the USA.

Authors:  Erin L Landguth; Zachary A Holden; Jonathan Graham; Benjamin Stark; Elham Bayat Mokhtari; Emily Kaleczyc; Stacey Anderson; Shawn Urbanski; Matt Jolly; Erin O Semmens; Dyer A Warren; Alan Swanson; Emily Stone; Curtis Noonan
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 9.621

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.