Methods to adjust for bias and confounding in critical care health services research involving observational data

Observational data are often used for research in critical care. Unlike randomized controlled trials, where randomization theoretically balances confounding factors, studies involving observational data pose the challenge of how to adjust appropriately for the bias and confounding that are inherent...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of critical care 2006-03, Vol.21 (1), p.1-7
Main Authors: Wunsch, Hannah, Linde-Zwirble, Walter T., C. Angus, Derek
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Antibiotics
Bias
Clinical trials
Confounding (Statistics)
Confounding Factors (Epidemiology)
Critical Care
Epidemiologic methods, confounding factors
Health Services Research - methods
Humans
Mortality
Nosocomial infections
Observation
Observational studies
Patients
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Research Design
Sepsis
Variables
Ventilators
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Observational data are often used for research in critical care. Unlike randomized controlled trials, where randomization theoretically balances confounding factors, studies involving observational data pose the challenge of how to adjust appropriately for the bias and confounding that are inherent when comparing two or more groups of patients. This paper first highlights the potential sources of bias and confounding in critical care research and then reviews the statistical techniques available (matching, stratification, multivariable adjustment, propensity scores, and instrumental variables) to adjust for confounders. Finally, issues that need to be addressed when interpreting the results of observational studies, such as residual confounding, causality, and missing data, are discussed.
ISSN:0883-9441
1557-8615
DOI:10.1016/j.jcrc.2006.01.004