Main objective of Epidemiology. Statistical Inference. Statistical Inference: Example. Statistical Inference: Example

Similar documents
Confounding Bias: Stratification

Confounding and Interaction

Epidemiological study design. Paul Pharoah Department of Public Health and Primary Care

INTERNAL VALIDITY, BIAS AND CONFOUNDING

Study Designs. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) RCT: Example 1. RCT: Two by Two Table. Outcome. Exposure. Yes a b No c d

Biases in clinical research. Seungho Ryu, MD, PhD Kanguk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University

Stratified Tables. Example: Effect of seat belt use on accident fatality

Confounding and Bias

Confounding, Effect modification, and Stratification

RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS. Study Designs. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) ASSIGN EXPOSURE Follow up Check for OUTCOME. Experimental studies

115 remained abstinent. 140 remained abstinent. Relapsed Remained abstinent Total

EPIDEMIOLOGY-BIOSTATISTICS EXAM Midterm 2004 PRINT YOUR LEGAL NAME:

Bias and confounding. Mads Kamper-Jørgensen, associate professor, Section of Social Medicine

Bias. A systematic error (caused by the investigator or the subjects) that causes an incorrect (overor under-) estimate of an association.

Epidemiology: Overview of Key Concepts and Study Design. Polly Marchbanks

Module 2: Fundamentals of Epidemiology Issues of Interpretation. Slide 1: Introduction. Slide 2: Acknowledgements. Slide 3: Presentation Objectives

University of Wollongong. Research Online. Australian Health Services Research Institute

Controlling Bias & Confounding

Strategies for data analysis: case-control studies

Biases in clinical research. Seungho Ryu, MD, PhD Kanguk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University

Confounding. Confounding and effect modification. Example (after Rothman, 1998) Beer and Rectal Ca. Confounding (after Rothman, 1998)

Confounding and Effect Modification. John McGready Johns Hopkins University

Section 6.1 Sampling. Population each element (or person) from the set of observations that can be made (entire group)

Cohort Study: Two by two table. Study Designs. Cohort Study: Example 1. Cohort Study: Direction of inquiry. Outcome. Exposure.

Person-years; number of study participants (number of cases) HR (95% CI) P for trend

1 Case Control Studies

Observational Study Designs. Review. Today. Measures of disease occurrence. Cohort Studies

INTERPRETATION OF STUDY FINDINGS: PART I. Julie E. Buring, ScD Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA

Understanding Statistics for Research Staff!

3. Factors such as race, age, sex, and a person s physiological state are all considered determinants of disease. a. True

Epidemiologic Methods and Counting Infections: The Basics of Surveillance

Is There An Association?

Bias. Sam Bracebridge

Observational Medical Studies. HRP 261 1/13/ am

Gathering. Useful Data. Chapter 3. Copyright 2004 Brooks/Cole, a division of Thomson Learning, Inc.

Purpose. Study Designs. Objectives. Observational Studies. Analytic Studies

Case-control studies. Hans Wolff. Service d épidémiologie clinique Département de médecine communautaire. WHO- Postgraduate course 2007 CC studies

Challenges of Observational and Retrospective Studies

Online Supplementary Material

Søren Friis. Center for Kræftforskning, Kræftens Bekæmpelse. Epidemiologi/Bias & confounding/phd/sep 2012/SF

Study Design STUDY DESIGN CASE SERIES AND CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY DESIGN

5 Bias and confounding

Epidemiologic Study Designs. (RCTs)

Søren Friis. Center for Kræftforskning, Kræftens Bekæmpelse. Epidemiology/Bias and confounding/phd/sep 2012/SF

Biases in clinical research. Seungho Ryu, MD, PhD Kanguk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Strategies for Data Analysis: Cohort and Case-control Studies

In the 1700s patients in charity hospitals sometimes slept two or more to a bed, regardless of diagnosis.

Types of Biomedical Research

Biostatistics and Epidemiology Step 1 Sample Questions Set 1

12/26/2013. Types of Biomedical Research. Clinical Research. 7Steps to do research INTRODUCTION & MEASUREMENT IN CLINICAL RESEARCH S T A T I S T I C

How do we know that smoking causes lung cancer?

Rapid appraisal of the literature: Identifying study biases

COPD and environmental risk factors other than smoking. 14. Summary

Lecture Slides. Elementary Statistics Eleventh Edition. by Mario F. Triola. and the Triola Statistics Series 1.1-1

Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies

Consideration of Anthropometric Measures in Cancer. S. Lani Park April 24, 2009

BIOSTATISTICAL METHODS

Chapter 1 - Sampling and Experimental Design

Penelitian IKM/Epidemiologi. Contact: Blog: suyatno.blog.undip.ac.id Hp/Telp: /

Joseph W Hogan Brown University & AMPATH February 16, 2010

10/21/2014. Considerations in the Selection of Research Participants. Reasons to think about participant selection

Assessment Schedule 2015 Mathematics and Statistics (Statistics): Evaluate statistically based reports (91584)

Since 1980, obesity has more than doubled worldwide, and in 2008 over 1.5 billion adults aged 20 years were overweight.

Study design. Chapter 64. Research Methodology S.B. MARTINS, A. ZIN, W. ZIN

Collecting Data Example: Does aspirin prevent heart attacks?

Clinical Research Design and Conduction

TEST YOURSELF: Multiple Choice 1 QUESTIONS

Incorporating Clinical Information into the Label

Chapter 2. Epidemiological and Toxicological Studies

Trial Designs. Professor Peter Cameron

Health Studies 315. Clinical Epidemiology: Evidence of Risk and Harm

You can t fix by analysis what you bungled by design. Fancy analysis can t fix a poorly designed study.

Research Methodology Workshop. Study Type

Impact of Offering Rapid HIV Testing in a High-volume Philadelphia STD Clinic

Epidemiology 2200b Lecture 3 (continued again) Review of sources of bias in Case-control, cohort and ecologic(al) studies

2. Studies of Cancer in Humans

A Pair-Matched Case Control Study of Family-Environmental Factors Associated with ADHD in Chinese Children

OVERALL HEALTH EFFECTS OF SWEDISH MATCH SNUS PRODUCTS

A situation analysis of health services. Rachel Jewkes, MRC Gender & Health Research Unit, Pretoria, South Africa

Lecture 4. Confounding

GATE CAT Intervention RCT/Cohort Studies

Understanding Confounding in Research Kantahyanee W. Murray and Anne Duggan. DOI: /pir

Outline. Case control studies. Study Designs. Case Control Study. Start with OUTCOME Go backwards Check for EXPOSURE. Experimental studies

2016 Value High percentage of hospital readmissions. High prevalence of falls $

Causal Association : Cause To Effect. Dr. Akhilesh Bhargava MD, DHA, PGDHRM Prof. Community Medicine & Director-SIHFW, Jaipur

General Biostatistics Concepts

Evidence-Based Medicine Journal Club. A Primer in Statistics, Study Design, and Epidemiology. August, 2013

ARTICLE REVIEW Article Review on Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6 12 Years of Age in Mexico

Handout 1: Introduction to the Research Process and Study Design STAT 335 Fall 2016

ARTICLE REVIEW Article Review on Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6 12 Years of Age in Mexico

Introduction. Step 2: Student Role - Your Plan of Action. Confounding. Good luck and have fun!

Confounding and Effect Modification

Bias and confounding special issues. Outline for evaluation of bias

first three years of life

SIH: Trials and Research Endeavors. Tim Amrhein, MD Assistant Professor of Neuroradiology Duke University Medical

Observational study II

Association between multiple comorbidities and self-rated health status in middle-aged and elderly Chinese: the China Kadoorie Biobank study

Tobacco, Alcohol, and

Fatal primary malignancy of brain. Glioblasatoma, histologically

Transcription:

Main objective of Epidemiology Inference to a population Example: Treatment of hypertension: Research question (hypothesis): Is treatment A better than treatment B for patients with hypertension? Study design: Clinical study: select a sample; 143 female nurses (30-50 yrs of age, with hypertension), administer randomly 2 treatments A and B. Statistical analysis on data. Interference on population Statistical Inference Study sample: 143 female nurses (30-50 years of age, with hypertension. Target population: female nurses (30-50 years of age, with hypertension). External population: males, females, all age groups, with hypertension. External population Target Study Sample Statistical Inference: Example Evaluate the performance of a drug before its release?? External population Target Study Sample Statistical Inference: Example Evaluate the performance of a drug before its release?? Based on the new drug s performance among a sample of patients with the disease, a conclusion is drawn regarding the drug s performance were it will be used among a population of patients with the disease. Concerns in Epidemiologic studies Concerns in Epidemiologic studies I. Internal validity: Was the study carefully designed and analyzed? I. Internal validity: Was the study carefully designed and analyzed? II. External validity (Generalizability): Are the results applicable to the external population? II. External validity (Generalizability): Are the results applicable to the external population? III. Reproducibility of the results (precision): Are the results reproducible? III. Reproducibility of the results (precision): Are the results reproducible?

Internal validity Internal validity The extent to which the analytic inference derived from study sample is correct for the target population. External population Target Study Sample The extent to which the analytic inference derived from study sample is correct for the target population 1. Sample selection bias 2. Information bias 3. Confounding bias 4. Reverse causality Sample selection bias Sample selection bias Sample should be representative of the target population. If the relation between the exposure and the outcome is different for those who do participate and those who would be eligible but do not participate, then we have selection bias. I. Referral Bias: if the sample is based from a referral of a specific community Referral Bias OC Thromboembolism Sample selection bias Thrumbo. Thrumbo. Hospital OC OC Total OC 20 80 100 Thrumbo. 50 15 85 100 Thrumbo. 15 OR=1.4 II. Self Selection Bias: subjects self select themselves into a study OC 50 85 Total 100 100 OR=5.7

Sample selection bias III. Healthy Worker Effect (HWE): healthy workers remain for the study (un-employed, retired are less healthy) Healthy Worker Effect Lifting heavy weight pain F-up Forestry workers F-up General population Back BP BP BP BP Results showed NO association :WHY??? Sample selection bias IV Loss to follow up: in Cohort studies Dust Chronic Lung Disease CLD CLD Total Dust 1,000 (10%) 9,000 (1%) 10,000 Dust 500 (2%) 9,500 (0%) 10,000 RR=2 Sample selection bias Loss to follow up: in Cohort studies Dust Chronic Lung Disease CLD CLD Total Dust 900 8,910 9,810 Dust 490 9,500 9,990 RR=1.8 Minimizing Selection Bias Information Bias (Misclassification Bias) To minimize selection bias: Select a representative sample of the target population. Errors in the classifying of the exposure or outcome.

Misclassification of Exposure Misclassification of Exposure Example: Recall bias Interviewers bias Error during data entry If misclassification of exposure is related to outcome: Differential Misclassification If misclassification of exposure is not related to outcome: Non-Differential Misclassification Misclassification of Outcome Example Diagnostic bias If misclassification of outcome is related to exposure: differential misclassification If misclassification of outcome is not related to exposure: non-differential misclassification Minimize Information Bias To minimize information bias: Standardize detection procedures Blind subjects and observers Confounding Bias: Example 1 Example 1: Does gambling cause cancer? Confounding Bias: Example 2 Example 2: TIME Magazine 1978: Sonic Doom- Can jet noise kill? Nevada state (gambling is legal) Utah state (gambling is illegal) Random sample Matched on age, sex, residence, family income Random sample Matched on age, sex, residence, family income 10 years Follow-up 10 years Follow-up If we eliminate gambling, prevent 86,000 cancer deaths a year???? The study was conducted in Los- Angeles. The study concluded: People living in areas where jet plane noise >90 decibels had a significant increased death rate. WHY???

Confounding Bias: Definition Confounding Bias: Definition Is present when the association between an exposure and an outcome is distorted by an extraneous third variable (referred to a confounding variable). For a variable to be a confounder, it must be: 1. A risk factor the disease 2. Associated with the exposure being studied. Confounding Bias: Example 3 Example 3: Study the association between coffee drinking and lung cancer LC Yes No Yes 80 15 No 20 85 Coffee OR= (80x 85)/ (15 x 20)= 22 Confounding Bias: Example 3 Is smoking a confounding variable? Coffee Lung cancer Smoking Smoking is a confounding variable. What would you conclude???? Confounding Bias: Minimize bias Research Design: Use of randomized clinical trial Restriction Matching Data Analysis: Stratification Multivariate statistical techniques Example 1: Association between place of residence & Chronic bronchitis Residence Chronic bronchitis Yes No Urban 194 2219 Rural 69 1208 RR= 1.48

Example 1: Stratified by Smoking: Smokers Non-smokers Bronchitis Bronchitis Residence Yes No Yes No Urban 167 1094 27 1125 Rural 53 417 16 791 Example 1: But 1.18 1.17 = 1.48 (crude) Smoking is a confounding variable! RR=1.18 RR=1.17 Example 2: Study the association between Alcohol consumption & Myocardial Infarction Alcohol MI Yes No Yes 71 52 OR=2.2 No 29 48 Example 2: Stratified by smoking: Smokers Non-smokers Alcohol MI No MI MI No MI Yes 8 16 63 36 No 22 44 7 4 OR=1 OR=1 Example 2: But 1 = 1 = 2.2 (crude) Smoking is a confounding variable! Example 3: Study the association between Treatment 1 & Treatment 2 with survival Alive Dead Total T1 40 60 100 T2 60 40 100 Total 100 100 200 RR (Crude) = 0.67

Example 3: Stratified by gender: Females Males Alive Dead Alive Dead T1 24 3 16 57 T2 58 30 2 10 RR=1.35 RR=1.32 Example 3: But 1.35 1.32 = 0.67 (crude) Gender is a confounding variable! Mantel-Haenzel: Calculating an adjusted RR i th stratum: Outcome No outcome Total E ai bi No E ci di Total Ni RR MH = ai(ci + di) /Ni ci(ai + bi) /Ni Mantel-Haenzel: Example Example: Females Males Success Failure Success Failure T1 24 3 16 57 T2 58 30 2 10 RR= 1.35 RR= 1.32 RR Adjusted = RR MH = 24(58+30)/115 + 16 (2+10)/85 58(24+3)/115 + 2 (16+57)/85 = 1.34 Concerns in Epidemiologic studies I. Internal validity: Was the study carefully designed and analyzed? II. III. External validity (Generalizability): Are the results applicable to the external population? Reproducibility of the results (precision): Are the results reproducible? External validity Also Known as generalizability. The extent to which the analytic inference derived from study sample is correct for the external population. External population Target Study Sample

External validity Concerns in Epidemiologic studies External validity is dependent on internal validity. I. Internal validity: Was the study carefully designed and analyzed? Maximize external validity by selecting study subject from a target population as similar as possible to the external population. II. III. External validity (Generalizability): Are the results applicable to the external population? Reproducibility of the results (precision): Are the results reproducible? Reproducibility Subjects in a study are always a sample of a population. Repetitive sampling results in a range of estimates for different samples: Sampling variation. The smaller the sample, the less reproducible will be the sample estimate. To decrease sampling error, increase sample size. Reproducibility Sample 1 Target Sample 2 Sample 3 Study sample Example 1: Association between severe injury & death. Death No Death Severe injury 45 55 No Severe injury 6 94 RR = 0.45/0.06 = 7.5 Example 1: Stratified by age: <65 years > 65years Death No Death No Death Death Severe injury 15 35 30 20 No Severe injury 2 28 4 66 RR= 4.48 RR= 10.5

Example 1: 4.48 = 10.5 = 7.5 (crude) Age is an effect modifier! When the exposure- outcome relationship is different for the different levels of a third variable, we have interaction (effect modification). The crude RR is hiding important effects. Solution: Report the RR separately for each category of the variable (for the different levels of the effect modifier). Example 2: D No D Total E 200 1800 2000 No E 400 3600 4000 Total 600 5400 6000 RR= (200/2000) / (400/4000) = 1 Example 2: 1.69 = 3 = 1 (crude) Female Males D No D Total D No D Total E 110 390 500 90 1410 1500 No E 380 2620 3000 20 980 1000 Total 490 3101 3500 110 2390 2500 RR= 1.69 RR= 3 Gender is an effect modifier! A Confounder or Effect modifiers? A Confounder or Effect modifiers? Males RR=2 Hip Fracture Obesity RR=1.6 Breast cancer Young Old Males Hip Fracture Males Hip Fracture RR= 0.7 RR= 3 Pre-menopausal Post-menopausal Obesity Breast cancer Obesity Breast cancer RR= 1.1 RR= 2

A Confounder or Effect modifiers? Smoking RR=3 Low birth weight (LBW) Young Old Smoking LBW Smoking LBW RR= 2 RR= 4 Example 2: A cohort study was conducted to evaluate the association between air pollution and a specific lung disease. From the information below would you conclude that gender is a confounder or an effect modifier??? D No D Total E 200 1800 2000 No E 400 3600 4000 Total 600 5400 6000 3500 individuals were females 500 females were exposed 490 females had the disease 110 females had disease & were exposed 1410 males were exposed & did not have the disease 20 males were not exposed & had the disease T (True) or F (False): To ensure that the study is internally valid we need to check for the 4 main biases: Selection bias, information bias, confounding and effect modification. T (True) or F (False): Generalizability is the extent to which the inference derived from the study sample is correct for the target population. External validity depends on If you increase the sample size you increase

T (True) or F (False): Blinding the interviewer minimizes observation bias. T (True) or F (False): Recall bias is common in case control studies while loss to follow up is common in randomized clinical trials. A cohort study is planned to investigate the association between maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy and fetal alcohol Syndrome (a disease that is difficult to diagnose) in newborn children. What are the possible biases? In a closed cohort study, most of those who were exposed and developed the disease died before the end of the study. What will happen to the RR? What are the characteristics of a confounder? T (True) or F (False): The crude relative risk for smoking and myocardial infarction was 2.8. When stratified by gender, the relative risk for males was 5.6 and 1.5 for females. The study investigators concluded that results are biased by gender which is an effect modifier and hence they adjusted for gender in the analysis.