Loading…
Non-differential misclassification of exposure always leads to an underestimate of risk: an incorrect conclusion
In most epidemiological surveys, there will be some errors of measurement or classification of exposure. For example, for a binary exposure variable, some exposed subjects may be classified as non-exposed, and some non-exposed subjects may be classified as exposed. Non-differential misclassification...
Saved in:
Published in: | Occupational and environmental medicine (London, England) England), 1994-12, Vol.51 (12), p.839-840 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | In most epidemiological surveys, there will be some errors of measurement or classification of exposure. For example, for a binary exposure variable, some exposed subjects may be classified as non-exposed, and some non-exposed subjects may be classified as exposed. Non-differential misclassification of exposure is present if, irrespective of disease, all exposed and non-exposed subjects have the same probability of being misclassified (these two probabilities may be different, one must be not zero). It is now commonplace to find statements in epidemiological textbooks, journal articles, and teaching materials to the effect that non-differential misclassification of exposure always leads to an underestimate of risk. Rothman, for example, states that "such misclassification can introduce a bias, but the bias is always in the direction of underestimating the effect", and Checkoway et al state "non-differential misclassification of exposure will bias the effect estimate toward the null value." This contradicts our expectation that studies may overestimate as well as underestimate effects, and we therefore tested these ideas by computer simulations relevant to study settings. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1351-0711 1470-7926 |
DOI: | 10.1136/oem.51.12.839 |