11/7/2023 0 Comments Intraction subsume main effect![]() J Epidemiol Community Health 32:303–313Įfron B, Morris C (1977) Stein’s paradox in statistics. ![]() J Natl Cancer Inst 22: 173–203ĭoll R, Peto R (1978) Cigarette smoking and bronchial carcinoma: dose and time relationships among regular smokers and lifelong nonsmokers. Am J Epidemiol 105:488–495Ĭornfield J, Haenszel W, Hammond EC, Lilienfeld AM, Shimkin MB, Wynder EL (1959) Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. Int J Epidemiol 31:163–165Ĭopeland KT, Checkoway H, McMichael AJ, Holbrook RH (1977) Bias due to misclassification in the estimation of relative risk. Scand J Work Environ Health 11:131–133Ĭole SR, Hernan MA (2002) Fallibility in estimating direct effects. Oxford University Press, New YorkĬheckoway H, Waldman GT (1985) Assessing the possible extent of confounding in occupational case-referent studies. Chapman and Hall, Boca RatonĬheckoway H, Pearce N, Kriebel D (2004) Research methods in occupational epidemiology. J Chronic Dis 20:487–495Ĭarroll RJ, Ruppert D, Stefanski LA, Crainiceanu C (2006) Measurement error in non-linear models. Am J Ind Med 13:105–118īross IDJ (1967) Pertinency of an extraneous variable. Scand J Work Environ Health 8(Suppl 1):15–19Īxelson O, Steenland K (1988) Indirect methods of assessing the effects of tobacco use in occupational studies. Br J Ind Med 46:505–507Īxelson O, Flodin U, Hardell L (1982) A comment on the reference series with regard to multiple exposure evaluations in a case-referent study. Scand J Work Environ Health 4:85–89Īxelson O (1989) Confounding from smoking in occupational epidemiology. Oxford University Press, New YorkĪxelson O (1978) Aspects on confounding in occupational health epidemiology. Occup Environ Med 55:651–656Īrmstrong B, White E, Saracci R (1992) Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.Īrmstrong BG (1998) Effect of measurement error on epidemiological studies of environmental and occupational exposures. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. Because these concepts and methods involve far more topics than we can cover in detail, we provide many references to further discussion beyond that in the present handbook, especially to relevant chapters in Modern Epidemiology by Rothman et al. (2008). This chapter covers the basic concepts of confounding and interaction and provides a brief overview of analytical approaches to these phenomena. Both confounding and interaction can be assessed by stratification on these other factors (i.e., the potential confounders or effect-measure modifiers). ![]() Interaction can be thought of as a modification, by other factors, of the effects of the exposure being studied on the health outcome of interest and can be subclassified into two major concepts: biological interdependence of effects, which includes concepts of synergism and antagonism, and effect-measure modification, also known as heterogeneity of a measure across the levels of another factor. When we are estimating the effect of a specific exposure on a specific health outcome, confounding can be thought of as a mixing of the effects of the exposure being studied with the effect(s) of other factor(s) on the risk of the health outcome of interest. The goal is usually to estimate the effect of one or more exposures on one or more health outcomes. All epidemiological studies are (or should be) based on a particular source population followed over a particular risk period.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |