偏置衰减的结果为二分类的连续混杂

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Journal of Causal Inference Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1515/jci-2022-0047
E. Gabriel, J. M. Pena, A. Sjölander
{"title":"偏置衰减的结果为二分类的连续混杂","authors":"E. Gabriel, J. M. Pena, A. Sjölander","doi":"10.1515/jci-2022-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is well-known that dichotomization can cause bias and loss of efficiency in estimation. One can easily construct examples where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder causes bias in causal estimation. There are additional examples in the literature where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder can be more biased than not adjusting at all. The message is clear, do not dichotomize. What is unclear is if there are scenarios where adjusting for the dichotomized confounder always leads to lower bias than not adjusting. We propose several sets of conditions that characterize scenarios where one should always adjust for the dichotomized confounder to reduce bias. We then highlight scenarios where the decision to adjust should be made more cautiously. To our knowledge, this is the first formal presentation of conditions that give information about when one should and potentially should not adjust for a dichotomized confounder.","PeriodicalId":48576,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Causal Inference","volume":"15 1","pages":"515 - 526"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bias attenuation results for dichotomization of a continuous confounder\",\"authors\":\"E. Gabriel, J. M. Pena, A. Sjölander\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jci-2022-0047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract It is well-known that dichotomization can cause bias and loss of efficiency in estimation. One can easily construct examples where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder causes bias in causal estimation. There are additional examples in the literature where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder can be more biased than not adjusting at all. The message is clear, do not dichotomize. What is unclear is if there are scenarios where adjusting for the dichotomized confounder always leads to lower bias than not adjusting. We propose several sets of conditions that characterize scenarios where one should always adjust for the dichotomized confounder to reduce bias. We then highlight scenarios where the decision to adjust should be made more cautiously. To our knowledge, this is the first formal presentation of conditions that give information about when one should and potentially should not adjust for a dichotomized confounder.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48576,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Causal Inference\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"515 - 526\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Causal Inference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jci-2022-0047\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Causal Inference","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jci-2022-0047","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要二分类方法在估计中会引起偏差和效率损失,这是众所周知的。我们可以很容易地构造一些例子,其中调整二分类混杂因素会导致因果估计中的偏差。文献中还有其他例子,其中调整二分类混杂因素可能比根本不调整更有偏见。信息很清楚,不要一分为二。目前尚不清楚的是,是否存在对二分类混杂因素进行调整总是比不进行调整导致更低偏差的情况。我们提出了几组条件,这些条件表征了人们应该始终调整二分类混杂因素以减少偏差的情况。然后,我们重点介绍了应该更加谨慎地做出调整决定的场景。据我们所知,这是第一次正式提出条件,提供了关于何时应该和可能不应该调整二分类混杂因素的信息。
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
Bias attenuation results for dichotomization of a continuous confounder
Abstract It is well-known that dichotomization can cause bias and loss of efficiency in estimation. One can easily construct examples where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder causes bias in causal estimation. There are additional examples in the literature where adjusting for a dichotomized confounder can be more biased than not adjusting at all. The message is clear, do not dichotomize. What is unclear is if there are scenarios where adjusting for the dichotomized confounder always leads to lower bias than not adjusting. We propose several sets of conditions that characterize scenarios where one should always adjust for the dichotomized confounder to reduce bias. We then highlight scenarios where the decision to adjust should be made more cautiously. To our knowledge, this is the first formal presentation of conditions that give information about when one should and potentially should not adjust for a dichotomized confounder.
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
Journal of Causal Inference
Journal of Causal Inference Decision Sciences-Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
15
审稿时长
86 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Causal Inference (JCI) publishes papers on theoretical and applied causal research across the range of academic disciplines that use quantitative tools to study causality.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating Boolean relationships in Configurational Comparative Methods Comparison of open-source software for producing directed acyclic graphs. LINGUISTIC FEATURES AND PRESENTATION OF MATERIALS ON ENGLISH TEXTBOOK “WHEN ENGLISH RINGS A BELL” BASED ON BSNP Heterogeneous interventional effects with multiple mediators: Semiparametric and nonparametric approaches Attributable fraction and related measures: Conceptual relations in the counterfactual framework
×
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