Björk Jonas, Strömberg Ulf
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Lund University Hospital, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Epidemiology. 2002 Jul;13(4):459-66. doi: 10.1097/00001648-200207000-00015.
Partially ecologic case-control studies combine group-level exposure data with individual-level data on disease status, group membership, and covariates. If the exposure measure is the exposure prevalence of various groups, the attributable fraction (AF; the estimated proportion of cases that are attributable to exposure) can be estimated by classifying all subjects in groups with exposure prevalence above zero as exposed. Such a threshold AF estimator ([AF]T) is unbiased in confounding-free situations if the threshold is 100% sensitive, but it might be imprecise. We propose an alternative AF estimator, [AF]L, for partially ecologic case-control studies under a linear model for the association between the exposure prevalence and the odds ratio. The proposed estimator can also be applied to situations in which covariate adjustment is necessary. [AF]T and [AF]L are compared with respect to precision and bias. [AF]L is also unbiased when the exposure prevalence is zero in the group(s) assessed as unexposed. Using [AF]L will consistently result in improved precision compared with [AF]T, although the results may not differ substantially. The 95% confidence intervals for both AF estimators show satisfactory coverage in bias-free exposure scenarios. Pronounced negative bias and decreased coverage result for both AF estimators even when small fractions (3-9%) of exposed subjects are included in the group assessed as unexposed.
部分生态学病例对照研究将群体水平的暴露数据与个体水平的疾病状态、群体成员身份及协变量数据相结合。如果暴露测量指标是各个群体的暴露患病率,那么可通过将所有暴露患病率高于零的群体中的所有受试者归类为暴露组,来估计归因分数(AF;即归因于暴露的病例的估计比例)。如果该阈值具有100%的敏感性,那么在无混杂因素的情况下,这种阈值AF估计量([AF]T)是无偏的,但可能不够精确。对于部分生态学病例对照研究,在线性模型下,我们针对暴露患病率与比值比之间的关联提出了一种替代的AF估计量[AF]L。所提出的估计量也可应用于需要进行协变量调整的情况。就精度和偏差而言,对[AF]T和[AF]L进行了比较。当在被评估为未暴露的组中暴露患病率为零时,[AF]L也是无偏的。与[AF]T相比,使用[AF]L始终会提高精度,尽管结果可能差异不大。在无偏差暴露场景中,两种AF估计量的95%置信区间均显示出令人满意的覆盖范围。即使在被评估为未暴露的组中包含一小部分(3 - 9%)暴露受试者,两种AF估计量都会出现明显的负偏差并导致覆盖范围降低。