4.5 Review

Epidemiologic analyses with error-prone exposures: review of current practice and recommendations

Journal

ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 11, Pages 821-828

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.09.001

Keywords

Air pollution; Cohort studies; Measurement error; Misclassification; Nutritional epidemiology; Physical activity

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council Fellowship [MR/M014827/1]
  2. National Cancer Institute Cancer center Support Grant [P30 CA012197]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Variables in observational studies are commonly subject to measurement error, but the impact of such errors is frequently ignored. As part of the STRengthening Analytical Thinking for Observational Studies Initiative, a task group on measurement error and misclassification seeks to describe the current practice for acknowledging and addressing measurement error. Methods: Task group on measurement error and misclassification conducted a literature survey of four types of research studies that are typically impacted by exposure measurement error: (1) dietary intake cohort studies, (2) dietary intake population surveys, (3) physical activity cohort studies, and (4) air pollution cohort studies. Results: The survey revealed that while researchers were generally aware that measurement error affected their studies, very few adjusted their analysis for the error. Most articles provided incomplete discussion of the potential effects of measurement error on their results. Regression calibration was the most widely used method of adjustment. Conclusions: Methods to correct for measurement error are available but require additional data regarding the error structure. There is a great need to incorporate such data collection within study designs and improve the analytical approach. Increased efforts by investigators, editors, and reviewers are needed to improve presentation of research when data are subject to error. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available