未测量混杂因素的回归分析

Q3 Mathematics Epidemiologic Methods Pub Date : 2019-08-22 DOI:10.1515/em-2019-0028
B. Knaeble, B. Osting, M. Abramson
{"title":"未测量混杂因素的回归分析","authors":"B. Knaeble, B. Osting, M. Abramson","doi":"10.1515/em-2019-0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract When studying the causal effect of x on y, researchers may conduct regression and report a confidence interval for the slope coefficient β x ${\\beta }_{x}$ . This common confidence interval provides an assessment of uncertainty from sampling error, but it does not assess uncertainty from confounding. An intervention on x may produce a response in y that is unexpected, and our misinterpretation of the slope happens when there are confounding factors w. When w are measured we may conduct multiple regression, but when w are unmeasured it is common practice to include a precautionary statement when reporting the confidence interval, warning against unwarranted causal interpretation. If the goal is robust causal interpretation then we can do something more informative. Uncertainty, in the specification of three confounding parameters can be propagated through an equation to produce a confounding interval. Here, we develop supporting mathematical theory and describe an example application. Our proposed methodology applies well to studies of a continuous response or rare outcome. It is a general method for quantifying error from model uncertainty. Whereas, confidence intervals are used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured individuals, confounding intervals can be used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured attributes.","PeriodicalId":37999,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regression analysis of unmeasured confounding\",\"authors\":\"B. Knaeble, B. Osting, M. Abramson\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/em-2019-0028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract When studying the causal effect of x on y, researchers may conduct regression and report a confidence interval for the slope coefficient β x ${\\\\beta }_{x}$ . This common confidence interval provides an assessment of uncertainty from sampling error, but it does not assess uncertainty from confounding. An intervention on x may produce a response in y that is unexpected, and our misinterpretation of the slope happens when there are confounding factors w. When w are measured we may conduct multiple regression, but when w are unmeasured it is common practice to include a precautionary statement when reporting the confidence interval, warning against unwarranted causal interpretation. If the goal is robust causal interpretation then we can do something more informative. Uncertainty, in the specification of three confounding parameters can be propagated through an equation to produce a confounding interval. Here, we develop supporting mathematical theory and describe an example application. Our proposed methodology applies well to studies of a continuous response or rare outcome. It is a general method for quantifying error from model uncertainty. Whereas, confidence intervals are used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured individuals, confounding intervals can be used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured attributes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologic Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologic Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/em-2019-0028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Mathematics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/em-2019-0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在研究x对y的因果关系时,研究人员可以进行回归并报告斜率系数β x ${\beta}_{x}$的置信区间。这个通用置信区间提供了抽样误差不确定性的评估,但它不能评估混杂的不确定性。对x的干预可能会在y中产生意想不到的响应,当存在混淆因素w时,我们对斜率的误解就会发生。当w被测量时,我们可能会进行多元回归,但当w未被测量时,通常的做法是在报告置信区间时包括预防性声明,警告不合理的因果解释。如果目标是健全的因果解释,那么我们可以做一些更有信息量的事情。不确定性,在规定的三个混杂参数可以通过一个方程传播产生一个混杂区间。在这里,我们开发了支持数学理论并描述了一个示例应用程序。我们提出的方法适用于连续反应或罕见结果的研究。这是对模型不确定性误差进行量化的一般方法。然而,置信区间用于评估来自未测量个体的不确定性,混淆区间可用于评估来自未测量属性的不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Regression analysis of unmeasured confounding
Abstract When studying the causal effect of x on y, researchers may conduct regression and report a confidence interval for the slope coefficient β x ${\beta }_{x}$ . This common confidence interval provides an assessment of uncertainty from sampling error, but it does not assess uncertainty from confounding. An intervention on x may produce a response in y that is unexpected, and our misinterpretation of the slope happens when there are confounding factors w. When w are measured we may conduct multiple regression, but when w are unmeasured it is common practice to include a precautionary statement when reporting the confidence interval, warning against unwarranted causal interpretation. If the goal is robust causal interpretation then we can do something more informative. Uncertainty, in the specification of three confounding parameters can be propagated through an equation to produce a confounding interval. Here, we develop supporting mathematical theory and describe an example application. Our proposed methodology applies well to studies of a continuous response or rare outcome. It is a general method for quantifying error from model uncertainty. Whereas, confidence intervals are used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured individuals, confounding intervals can be used to assess uncertainty from unmeasured attributes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiologic Methods
Epidemiologic Methods Mathematics-Applied Mathematics
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Epidemiologic Methods (EM) seeks contributions comparable to those of the leading epidemiologic journals, but also invites papers that may be more technical or of greater length than what has traditionally been allowed by journals in epidemiology. Applications and examples with real data to illustrate methodology are strongly encouraged but not required. Topics. genetic epidemiology, infectious disease, pharmaco-epidemiology, ecologic studies, environmental exposures, screening, surveillance, social networks, comparative effectiveness, statistical modeling, causal inference, measurement error, study design, meta-analysis
期刊最新文献
Linked shrinkage to improve estimation of interaction effects in regression models. Bounds for selection bias using outcome probabilities Population dynamic study of two prey one predator system with disease in first prey using fuzzy impulsive control Development and application of an evidence-based directed acyclic graph to evaluate the associations between metal mixtures and cardiometabolic outcomes. Performance evaluation of ResNet model for classification of tomato plant disease
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1