Assessment and control of confounding in trauma research

被引:11
作者
Kurth, Tobias
Sonis, Jeffrey
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Med,Div Prevent Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Med,Div Prevent Med, Boston, MA 02120 USA
[3] Harvard Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Sch Med, Dept Social Med, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[5] Univ N Carolina, Sch Med, Dept Family Med, Chapel Hill, NC USA
关键词
D O I
10.1002/jts.20298
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Confounding is a central problem in nonexperimental trauma research. In this article, the authors review recent advances in the theoretical conception of confounding, with an emphasis on the counterfactual definition of confounding. The strengths and limitations of different techniques for controlling confounding are discussed. Special attention is given to propensity scores, a method that has been used widely in the health sciences, but only rarely in trauma research, in the last several years. The article is written for researchers who use data analytic methods to control confounding and for clinicians who read original research articles to inform their clinical practice. Guidelines to assess the appropriate use of multiple regression models and propensity scores are offered.
引用
收藏
页码:807 / 820
页数:14
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
Angrist JD, 1996, J AM STAT ASSOC, V91, P444, DOI 10.2307/2291629
[2]  
BLOCK C, 2000, 183128 NCJ
[3]  
BLOCK CR, 2003, NIJ J, P4
[4]  
BLOCK CR, 1999, VIOLENCE AGAINST WOM, V5, P1158, DOI DOI 10.1177/10778019922183309
[5]   A propensity score analysis of brief worksite crisis interventions after the World Trade Center disaster implications for intervention and research [J].
Boscarino, JA ;
Adams, RE ;
Foa, EB ;
Landrigan, PJ .
MEDICAL CARE, 2006, 44 (05) :454-462
[6]  
Breitman Noelia, 2004, Violence Vict, V19, P321, DOI 10.1891/vivi.19.3.321.65764
[7]  
Bromet E, 1998, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V147, P353
[8]   Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders [J].
Cepeda, MS ;
Boston, R ;
Farrar, JT ;
Strom, BL .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 158 (03) :280-287
[9]  
D'Agostino RB, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P2265, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::AID-SIM918>3.0.CO
[10]  
2-B