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
[31]   Performance of comorbidity scores to control for confounding in epidemiologic studies using claims data [J].
Schneeweiss, S ;
Seeger, JD ;
Maclure, M ;
Wang, PS ;
Avorn, J ;
Glynn, RJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 154 (09) :854-864
[32]  
SEEGER JD, IN PRESS USE PROPENS
[33]  
Sheridan D J, 1993, AWHONNS Clin Issues Perinat Womens Health Nurs, V4, P471
[34]  
SONIS J, IN PRESS J PSYCHOL T
[35]  
Statistics Canada, 1993, VIOL WOM SURV
[36]   The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) - Development and preliminary psychometric data [J].
Straus, MA ;
Hamby, SL ;
BoneyMcCoy, S ;
Sugarman, DB .
JOURNAL OF FAMILY ISSUES, 1996, 17 (03) :283-316
[37]   A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methods [J].
Stürmer, T ;
Joshi, M ;
Glynn, RJ ;
Avorn, J ;
Rothman, KJ ;
Schneeweiss, S .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 59 (05) :437-447
[38]   Propensity scores: help or hype? [J].
Winkelmayer, WC ;
Kurth, T .
NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 19 (07) :1671-1673