© 1996 Oxford University Press
research-article |
Basic Methods for Sensitivity Analysis of Biases
Department of Epidemiology, UCLA School of Public Health Los Angeles, CA 90095-1772, USA
Greenland S (Department of Epidemiology, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1772, USA). Basic methods for sensitivity analysis of biases. International Journal of Epidemiology 1996; 25: 1107–1116
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.
Keywords bias, case-control studies, misclassification, relative risk, odds ratio, validity
Revised 1 May 1996
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G Maldonado Adjusting a relative-risk estimate for study imperfections J. Epidemiol. Community Health, July 1, 2008; 62(7): 655 - 663. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. J. Chang, D. M. Stamilio, and G. A. Macones Effect of Hospital Volume on Maternal Outcomes in Women with Prior Cesarean Delivery Undergoing Trial of Labor Am. J. Epidemiol., March 15, 2008; 167(6): 711 - 718. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Toh, A. A. Mitchell, M. M. Werler, and S. Hernandez-Diaz Sensitivity and Specificity of Computerized Algorithms to Classify Gestational Periods in the Absence of Information on Date of Conception Am. J. Epidemiol., March 15, 2008; 167(6): 633 - 640. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Bonner, J. Coble, A. Blair, L. E. Beane Freeman, J. A. Hoppin, D. P. Sandler, and M. C. R. Alavanja Malathion Exposure and the Incidence of Cancer in the Agricultural Health Study Am. J. Epidemiol., November 1, 2007; 166(9): 1023 - 1034. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Mensah, E. Willett, J Simpson, A. Smith, and E Roman Birth Order and Sibship Size: Evaluation of the Role of Selection Bias in a Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Am. J. Epidemiol., September 15, 2007; 166(6): 717 - 723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Fewell, G. Davey Smith, and J. A. C. Sterne The Impact of Residual and Unmeasured Confounding in Epidemiologic Studies: A Simulation Study Am. J. Epidemiol., September 15, 2007; 166(6): 646 - 655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Sturmer, S. Schneeweiss, K. J. Rothman, J. Avorn, and R. J. Glynn Performance of Propensity Score Calibration--A Simulation Study Am. J. Epidemiol., May 15, 2007; 165(10): 1110 - 1118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|