全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Validation Study Methods for Estimating Odds Ratio in Tables When Exposure is Misclassified

DOI: 10.1155/2013/170120

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Background. Misclassification of exposure variables in epidemiologic studies may lead to biased estimation of parameters and loss of power in statistical inferences. In this paper, the inverse matrix method, as an efficient method of the correction of odds ratio for the misclassification of a binary exposure, was generalized to nondifferential misclassification and tables. Methods. Simple estimates for predictive values when misclassification is nondifferential are presented. Using them, we estimated the corrected log odds ratio and its variance for tables, using the inverse matrix method. A two-step weighted likelihood method was also developed. Moreover, we compared the matrix and inverse matrix methods to the maximum likelihood (MLE) method using a simulation study. Results. In all situations, the inverse matrix method proved to be more efficient than the matrix method. Matrix and inverse matrix methods for nondifferential situations are more efficient than differential misclassification. Conclusions. Although MLE is optimal among all of the methods, it is computationally difficult and requires programming. On the other hand, the inverse matrix method with a simple closed-form presents acceptable efficiency. 1. Introduction In epidemiology studies, where the assessment of the relationship between exposure and outcome variables is the main goal, misclassification of exposure variable leads to biased estimate of odds ratio. In multicenter clinical trials with an increasing number of centers, the possibility of misclassification of the exposure variable and the biases induced by it will arise. Methods to correct a possibly misclassified exposure so that the strength of the association between exposure and outcome variables can be precisely assessed have been a focus of statistical and epidemiological research for over 30 years. Beginning with classic papers, the issue of misclassification on tabular data has long been recognized and their adjustment has been considered [1–5]. In 1977, the matrix method was presented by Barron in order to correct nondifferential misclassification in tables [6]. Greenland and Kleinbaum generalized it to differential misclassification and match paired data [7]. In addition, Greenland proposed a variance estimate for the matrix method under the assumptions of differential and nondifferential misclassifications [8]. Selen, in a simulation study, showed that both the matrix and the maximum likelihood methods performed equally well [9]. In 1990, Marshall presented a more direct inverse matrix approach for correcting

References

[1]  I. Bross, “Misclassification in tables,” Biometrics, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 478–486, 1954.
[2]  I. D. J. Bross, “Spurious effects from an extraneous variable,” Journal of Chronic Diseases, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 637–647, 1966.
[3]  J. Cornfield, W. Haenszel, E. C. Hammond, A. M. Lillienfeld, M. B. Shimkin, and E. L. Wynder, “Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 22, pp. 173–203, 1959.
[4]  G. G. Koch, “The effect of non-sampling errors on measures of association in contingency tables,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 64, no. 327, pp. 852–863, 1969.
[5]  A. Tenenbein, “A double sampling scheme for estimating from binomial data with misclassifications,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 65, no. 331, pp. 1350–1361, 1970.
[6]  B. A. Barron, “The effects of misclassification on the estimation of relative risk,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 414–418, 1977.
[7]  S. Greenland and D. Kleinbaum, “Correcting for misclassification in two-way tables and matched-pair studies,” International Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 93–97, 1983.
[8]  S. Greenland, “Variance estimation for epidemiologic effect estimates under misclassification,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 745–757, 1988.
[9]  J. Selen, “Adjusting for errors in classification and measurement in the analysis of partly and purely categorical data,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 81, no. 393, pp. 75–81, 1986.
[10]  R. J. Marshall, “Validation study methods for estimating exposure proportions and odds ratios with misclassified data,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 941–947, 1990.
[11]  M. J. Morrissey and D. Spiegelman, “Matrix methods for estimating odds ratios with misclassified exposure data: extensions and comparisons,” Biometrics, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 338–344, 1999.
[12]  O. Davidov, D. Faraggi, and B. Reiser, “Misclassification in logistic regression with discrete covariates,” Biometrical Journal, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 541–553, 2003.
[13]  X. Liu and K.-Y. Liang, “Adjustment for non-differential misclassification error in the generalized linear model,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1197–1211, 1991.
[14]  X. Luan, W. Pan, S. G. Gerberich, and B. P. Carlin, “Does it always help to adjust for misclassification of a binary outcome in logistics regression?” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 24, no. 14, pp. 2221–2234, 2005.
[15]  L. S. Magder and J. P. Hughes, “Logistic regression when the outcome is measured with uncertainty,” The American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 146, no. 2, pp. 195–203, 1997.
[16]  R. J. Carroll, D. Ruppert, L. A. Stefanski, and C. M. Crainiceanu, Measurement Error in Nonlinear Models: A Modern Perspective, Chapman & Hall, New York, NY, USA, 2010.
[17]  H. Chu, Z. Wang, S. R. Cole, and S. Greenland, “Sensitivity analysis of misclassification: a graphical and a Bayesian approach,” Annals of Epidemiology, vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 834–841, 2006.
[18]  S. Greenland, “Maximum-likelihood and closed-form estimators of epidemiologic measures under misclassification,” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 528–538, 2008.
[19]  R. H. Lyles, “A note on estimating crude odds ratios in case-control studies with differentially misclassified exposure,” Biometrics, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 1034–1037, 2002.
[20]  R. H. Lyles and J. Lin, “Sensitivity analysis for misclassification in logistic regression via likelihood methods and predictive value weighting,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 29, no. 22, pp. 2297–2309, 2010.
[21]  A. M. Jurek, S. Greenland, and G. Maldonado, “Brief report: how far from non-differential does exposure or disease misclassification have to be to bias measures of association away from the null?” International Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 382–385, 2008.
[22]  J. F. Kraus, S. Greenland, and M. Bulterys, “Risk factors for sudden infant death syndrome in the US collaborative perinatal project,” International Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 113–120, 1989.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133