首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Epidemiology >The table 2 fallacy: Presenting and interpreting confounder and modifier coefficients
【24h】

The table 2 fallacy: Presenting and interpreting confounder and modifier coefficients

机译:表2谬误:呈现和解释混杂系数和修饰系数

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

It is common to present multiple adjusted effect estimates from a single model in a single table. For example, a table might show odds ratios for one or more exposures and also for several confounders from a single logistic regression. This can lead to mistaken interpretations of these estimates. We use causal diagrams to display the sources of the problems. Presentation of exposure and confounder effect estimates from a single model may lead to several interpretative difficulties, inviting confusion of direct-effect estimates with total-effect estimates for covariates in the model. These effect estimates may also be confounded even though the effect estimate for the main exposure is not confounded. Interpretation of these effect estimates is further complicated by heterogeneity (variation, modification) of the exposure effect measure across covariate levels. We offer suggestions to limit potential misunderstandings when multiple effect estimates are presented, including precise distinction between total and direct effect measures from a single model, and use of multiple models tailored to yield total-effect estimates for covariates. ? 2013 The Author.
机译:通常在单个表中显示来自单个模型的多个调整后的效果估计。例如,一张表可能显示一个或多个曝光的比值比,也可能显示单个logistic回归的几个混杂因素的比值比。这可能导致对这些估计的错误解释。我们使用因果图来显示问题的根源。单个模型的暴露和混杂效应估计值的呈现可能会导致几个解释上的困难,从而使模型中协变量的直接效应估计值与总效应估计值混淆。即使对主要暴露的影响估计没有混淆,这些影响估计也可能会混淆。跨协变量水平的暴露效应度量的异质性(变异,修改)使这些效应估计的解释更加复杂。当提出多重效应估计时,我们提供了一些建议来限制潜在的误解,包括从单个模型中精确区分总效应和直接效应度量,以及使用量身定制的多个模型来产生协变量的总效应估计。 ? 2013作者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号