BIAS FROM NONDIFFERENTIAL MISCLASSIFICATION IN CASE-CONTROL STUDIES WITH 3 EXPOSURE LEVELS

被引:35
作者
CORREAVILLASENOR, A
STEWART, WF
FRANCOMARINA, F
SEACAT, H
机构
[1] Department of Epidemiology, School of Hygiene and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
[2] General Directorate of Epidemiology, Health Secretariate
关键词
BIAS; CASE CONTROL STUDIES; NONDIFFERENTIAL MISCLASSIFICATION; CATEGORICAL EXPOSURES; 3 EXPOSURE LEVELS;
D O I
10.1097/00001648-199505000-00015
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
In case control studies with three exposure levels where disease risk is associated with exposure, the direction of bias in the odds ratios (ORs) from nondifferential misclassification depends on the risk level, misclassification rates, and exposure distributions. To extend these generalizations, we present a graphical analysis of bias from nondifferential misclassification assuming linear and nonlinear monotonic increasing exposure-risk patterns. In both middle and upper exposure levels, bias is usually toward the null, increasing in magnitude as the misclassification rates increase and as the skewness of the exposure distribution increases. In the middle exposure level, bias away from the null may occur when the misclassification rate is low in the reference level and moderate to high in the upper exposure level, and risk increases with exposure. Bias away from the null does not occur in the upper exposure level. In both excess risk levels, crossover bias (that is, a reversal of the OR) may occur when exposure classification is worse than chance. The magnitude of bias away from the null is constrained by the unbiased OR of the upper exposure level, whereas that of crossover bias is constrained by the inverse of the unbiased OR of the upper exposure level.
引用
收藏
页码:276 / 281
页数:6
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
Bross I., Misclassification in 2×2 tables, Biometrics, 10, pp. 478-486, (1954)
[2]  
Copeland K.T., Checkoway H., McMichael A.J., Holbrook R.H., Bias due to misclassification in the estimation of relative risk, Am J Epidemiol, 105, pp. 488-495, (1977)
[3]  
Gladen B., Rogan W.J., Misclassification and the design of environmental studies, Am J Epidemiol, 109, pp. 609-616, (1979)
[4]  
Flegal K.M., Brownie C., Haas J.D., The effects of exposure misclassification on estimates of relative risk, Am J Epidemiol, 123, pp. 736-751, (1986)
[5]  
Stewart W.F., Correa-Villasenor A., False positive exposure errors and low exposure prevalence in community-based case-control studies, Appl Occup Environ Hyg, 6, pp. 534-540, (1991)
[6]  
Marshall J.R., Roger P., Graham S., Brasure J., On the distortion of risk estimates in multiple exposure level case-control studies, Am J Epidemiol, 113, pp. 464-473, (1981)
[7]  
Freudenheim J.L., Marshall J.R., The problem of profound mismeasurement and the power of epidemiological studies of diet and cancer, Nutr Cancer, 11, pp. 243-250, (1988)
[8]  
Birkett N.J., Effect of nondifferential misclassification on estimates of odds ratios with multiple levels of exposure, Am J Epidemiol, 136, pp. 356-362, (1992)
[9]  
Correa-Villasenor A., Stewart W.S., Franco-Marina F., Hwang H., Distortions of risk estimates under nondifferential misclassification in case-control studies with three exposure levels (Abstract), Am J Epidemiol, 136, (1992)
[10]  
Verkerk P.H., Buitenddijk. Non-differential underestimation may cause a threshold effect of exposure to appear as a dose-response relationship, J Clin Epidemiol, 45, pp. 543-545, (1992)