Common strategies to decide whether a variable is a confounder that should be adjusted for in the analysis rely mostly on statistical criteria. The authors present findings from the Slone Epidemiology Unit Birth Defects Study, 1992-1997, a case-control study on folic acid supplementation and risk of neural tube defects. When statistical strategies for confounding evaluation are used, the adjusted odds ratio is 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.62, 1.21). However, the consideration of a priori causal knowledge suggests that the crude odds ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.46, 0.94) should be used because the adjusted odds ratio is invalid. Causal diagrams are used to encode qualitative a priori subject matter knowledge.
%0 Journal Article
%1 Hernan2002
%A Hernán, Miguel A
%A Hernández-Díaz, Sonia
%A Werler, Martha M
%A Mitchell, Allen A
%D 2002
%J American journal of epidemiology
%K Bias(Epidemiology) Causality ConfoundingFactors(Epidemiology) EpidemiologicMethods Female FolicAcid FolicAcid:therapeuticuse Humans Infant MentalRecall NeuralTubeDefects NeuralTubeDefects:epidemiology NeuralTubeDefects:prevention&control Newborn Ontario Ontario:epidemiology Pregnancy UnitedStates UnitedStates:epidemiology
%N 2
%P 176-84
%T Causal knowledge as a prerequisite for confounding evaluation: an application to birth defects epidemiology.
%U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11790682
%V 155
%X Common strategies to decide whether a variable is a confounder that should be adjusted for in the analysis rely mostly on statistical criteria. The authors present findings from the Slone Epidemiology Unit Birth Defects Study, 1992-1997, a case-control study on folic acid supplementation and risk of neural tube defects. When statistical strategies for confounding evaluation are used, the adjusted odds ratio is 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.62, 1.21). However, the consideration of a priori causal knowledge suggests that the crude odds ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.46, 0.94) should be used because the adjusted odds ratio is invalid. Causal diagrams are used to encode qualitative a priori subject matter knowledge.
@article{Hernan2002,
abstract = {Common strategies to decide whether a variable is a confounder that should be adjusted for in the analysis rely mostly on statistical criteria. The authors present findings from the Slone Epidemiology Unit Birth Defects Study, 1992-1997, a case-control study on folic acid supplementation and risk of neural tube defects. When statistical strategies for confounding evaluation are used, the adjusted odds ratio is 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.62, 1.21). However, the consideration of a priori causal knowledge suggests that the crude odds ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.46, 0.94) should be used because the adjusted odds ratio is invalid. Causal diagrams are used to encode qualitative a priori subject matter knowledge.},
added-at = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100},
author = {Hernán, Miguel A and Hernández-Díaz, Sonia and Werler, Martha M and Mitchell, Allen A},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/28793bc47be17df4ef17b6ec74bd05a63/jepcastel},
interhash = {af9e35d72db6d1611dbe1d25f82f4c70},
intrahash = {8793bc47be17df4ef17b6ec74bd05a63},
issn = {0002-9262},
journal = {American journal of epidemiology},
keywords = {Bias(Epidemiology) Causality ConfoundingFactors(Epidemiology) EpidemiologicMethods Female FolicAcid FolicAcid:therapeuticuse Humans Infant MentalRecall NeuralTubeDefects NeuralTubeDefects:epidemiology NeuralTubeDefects:prevention&control Newborn Ontario Ontario:epidemiology Pregnancy UnitedStates UnitedStates:epidemiology},
month = {1},
note = {2868<m:linebreak></m:linebreak>Mesures d'associació},
number = 2,
pages = {176-84},
pmid = {11790682},
timestamp = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100},
title = {Causal knowledge as a prerequisite for confounding evaluation: an application to birth defects epidemiology.},
url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11790682},
volume = 155,
year = 2002
}