This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

A tool for deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis of epidemiologic studies

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Nicola Orsini () (Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet)
Rino Bellocco (Department of Statistics, University of Milano-Bicocca)
Matteo Bottai (Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of South Carolina)
Alicja Wolk (Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet)
Sander Greenland (Departments of Epidemiology and Statistics, University of California, Los Angeles)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Classification errors, selection bias, and uncontrolled confounders are likely to be present in most epidemiologic studies, but the uncertainty introduced by these types of biases is seldom quantified. The authors present a simple yet easy- to-use Stata command to adjust the relative risk for exposure misclassification, selection bias, and an unmeasured confounder. This command implements both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. It allows the user to specify a variety of probability distributions for the bias parameters, which are used to simulate distributions for the bias-adjusted exposure – disease relative risk. We illustrate the command by applying it to a case – control study of occupational resin exposure and lung-cancer deaths. By using plausible probability distributions for the bias parameters, investigators can report results that incorporate their uncertainties regarding systematic errors and thus avoid overstating their certainty about the effect under study. These results can supplement conventional results and can help pinpoint ma jor sources of conflict in study interpretations. Copyright 2008 by StataCorp LP.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0138
File Format:
File Function: link to article purchase
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://www.stata-journal.com/software/sj8-1/st0138/
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by StataCorp LP in its journal Stata Journal.

Volume (Year): 8 (2008)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
Pages: 29-48
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:tsj:stataj:v:8:y:2008:i:1:p:29-48

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.stata-journal.com/

Order Information:
Web: http://www.stata-journal.com/subscription.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: episens; episensi; sensitivity analysis; unmeasured confounder; misclassification; bias; epidemiology;

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS was launched in September 1997.

This page was last updated on 2009-10-27.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.