Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
ERA-EDTA Registry, Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015 Sep;30(9):1418-23. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfu325. Epub 2014 Oct 16.
Since confounding obscures the real effect of the exposure, it is important to adequately address confounding for making valid causal inferences from observational data. Directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) are visual representations of causal assumptions that are increasingly used in modern epidemiology. They can help to identify the presence of confounding for the causal question at hand. This structured approach serves as a visual aid in the scientific discussion by making underlying relations explicit. This article explains the basic concepts of DAGs and provides examples in the field of nephrology with and without presence of confounding. Ultimately, these examples will show that DAGs can be preferable to the traditional methods to identify sources of confounding, especially in complex research questions.
由于混杂因素会掩盖暴露的真实效果,因此在从观察性数据中得出有效的因果推论时,充分解决混杂因素非常重要。有向无环图(DAG)是因果假设的可视化表示,在现代流行病学中越来越多地使用。它们可以帮助确定手头因果问题是否存在混杂。这种结构化方法通过使潜在关系显式化,为科学讨论提供了一种视觉辅助。本文解释了 DAG 的基本概念,并提供了肾脏病学领域存在和不存在混杂因素的示例。最终,这些示例将表明,DAG 可以优于传统方法来识别混杂来源,尤其是在复杂的研究问题中。