• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

存在测量误差时的阴性对照暴露研究:对尝试进行效应估计校准的影响。

Negative control exposure studies in the presence of measurement error: implications for attempted effect estimate calibration.

机构信息

MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

Int J Epidemiol. 2018 Apr 1;47(2):587-596. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx213.

DOI:10.1093/ije/dyx213
PMID:29088358
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5913619/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Negative control exposure studies are increasingly being used in epidemiological studies to strengthen causal inference regarding an exposure-outcome association when unobserved confounding is thought to be present. Negative control exposure studies contrast the magnitude of association of the negative control, which has no causal effect on the outcome but is associated with the unmeasured confounders in the same way as the exposure, with the magnitude of the association of the exposure with the outcome. A markedly larger effect of the exposure on the outcome than the negative control on the outcome strengthens inference that the exposure has a causal effect on the outcome.

METHODS

We investigate the effect of measurement error in the exposure and negative control variables on the results obtained from a negative control exposure study. We do this in models with continuous and binary exposure and negative control variables using analysis of the bias of the estimated coefficients and Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

Our results show that measurement error in either the exposure or negative control variables can bias the estimated results from the negative control exposure study.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement error is common in the variables used in epidemiological studies; these results show that negative control exposure studies cannot be used to precisely determine the size of the effect of the exposure variable, or adequately adjust for unobserved confounding; however, they can be used as part of a body of evidence to aid inference as to whether a causal effect of the exposure on the outcome is present.

摘要

背景

当认为存在未观察到的混杂因素时,阴性对照暴露研究越来越多地被用于流行病学研究中,以加强暴露-结局关联的因果推断。阴性对照暴露研究对比了阴性对照的关联程度,阴性对照对结局没有因果影响,但与未测量的混杂因素的关联方式与暴露相同,与暴露与结局的关联程度进行对比。暴露对结局的影响明显大于阴性对照对结局的影响,这加强了暴露对结局有因果影响的推断。

方法

我们研究了暴露和阴性对照变量中的测量误差对阴性对照暴露研究结果的影响。我们在连续和二分类暴露和阴性对照变量的模型中,使用估计系数的偏差分析和蒙特卡罗模拟来进行研究。

结果

我们的结果表明,暴露或阴性对照变量中的测量误差都可能会对阴性对照暴露研究的估计结果产生偏差。

结论

在流行病学研究中使用的变量中,测量误差很常见;这些结果表明,阴性对照暴露研究不能用来精确确定暴露变量的效应大小,或充分调整未观察到的混杂因素;然而,它们可以作为证据的一部分,帮助推断暴露对结局是否存在因果效应。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/e39b9c1536b0/dyx213f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/e97f1b6b7b23/dyx213f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/f46f01bc1308/dyx213f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/e39b9c1536b0/dyx213f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/e97f1b6b7b23/dyx213f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/f46f01bc1308/dyx213f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e784/5913619/e39b9c1536b0/dyx213f3.jpg

相似文献

1
Negative control exposure studies in the presence of measurement error: implications for attempted effect estimate calibration.存在测量误差时的阴性对照暴露研究:对尝试进行效应估计校准的影响。
Int J Epidemiol. 2018 Apr 1;47(2):587-596. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx213.
2
The control outcome calibration approach for causal inference with unobserved confounding.有未观测混杂时因果推断的控制结局校准方法。
Am J Epidemiol. 2014 Mar 1;179(5):633-40. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt303. Epub 2013 Dec 20.
3
Familial confounding or measurement error? How to interpret findings from sibling and co-twin control studies.家族性混杂还是测量误差?如何解释来自同胞和同卵双生子对照研究的结果。
Eur J Epidemiol. 2024 Jun;39(6):587-603. doi: 10.1007/s10654-024-01132-6. Epub 2024 Jun 16.
4
The impact of residual and unmeasured confounding in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study.流行病学研究中残余混杂和未测量混杂的影响:一项模拟研究。
Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Sep 15;166(6):646-55. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm165. Epub 2007 Jul 5.
5
[Probe variables: a tool for identification of unmeasured confounders in an observational study].[探索性变量:一种在观察性研究中识别未测量混杂因素的工具]
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2021 Apr 10;42(4):735-739. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112338-20200315-00355.
6
Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in causal mediation analysis.贝叶斯敏感性分析在因果中介分析中对未测量混杂因素的影响。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 Feb;28(2):515-531. doi: 10.1177/0962280217729844. Epub 2017 Sep 7.
7
Assessing the impact of unmeasured confounding for binary outcomes using confounding functions.使用混杂函数评估二分类结局中未测量混杂的影响。
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Aug 1;46(4):1303-1311. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx023.
8
Single proxy control.单一代理控制。
Biometrics. 2024 Mar 27;80(2). doi: 10.1093/biomtc/ujae027.
9
The impact of unmeasured within- and between-cluster confounding on the bias of effect estimatorsof a continuous exposure.未测量的组内和组间混杂因素对连续暴露效应估计值偏倚的影响。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2020 Aug;29(8):2119-2139. doi: 10.1177/0962280219883323. Epub 2019 Nov 7.
10
Using fathers as a negative control exposure: Implications of measurement bias.将父亲作为阴性对照暴露因素:测量偏倚的影响
Scand J Public Health. 2020 Aug;48(6):674-675. doi: 10.1177/1403494819850895. Epub 2019 Jul 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Exposure to daily mean and maximum 1-hour PM concentrations and pediatric respiratory mortality in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area.墨西哥城大都市区每日平均及最高1小时颗粒物浓度暴露与儿童呼吸系统死亡率
Environ Epidemiol. 2025 Jun 25;9(4):e408. doi: 10.1097/EE9.0000000000000408. eCollection 2025 Aug.
2
The validity of test-negative design for assessment of typhoid conjugate vaccine protection: comparison of estimates by different study designs using data from a cluster-randomised controlled trial.用于评估伤寒结合疫苗保护效果的检测阴性设计的有效性:使用来自一项整群随机对照试验的数据,比较不同研究设计的估计值
Lancet Glob Health. 2025 Jun;13(6):e1122-e1131. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(25)00056-7. Epub 2025 Apr 16.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Maternal alcohol use during pregnancy and offspring attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a prospective sibling control study.母亲孕期饮酒与子女注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD):一项前瞻性同胞对照研究。
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Oct 1;46(5):1633-1640. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx067.
2
Invited Commentary: Bias Attenuation and Identification of Causal Effects With Multiple Negative Controls.特邀评论:使用多个阴性对照进行偏倚衰减和因果效应识别
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 May 15;185(10):950-953. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx012.
3
A New Method for Partial Correction of Residual Confounding in Time-Series and Other Observational Studies.
Association of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccination With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Among Older Adult Recipients of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccines: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.
肺炎球菌结合疫苗接种与 COVID-19 疫苗接种老年患者严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2 感染的相关性:一项纵向队列研究。
J Infect Dis. 2024 Nov 15;230(5):e1082-e1091. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiae387.
4
Non-linear Mendelian randomization: detection of biases using negative controls with a focus on BMI, Vitamin D and LDL cholesterol.非线性孟德尔随机化:使用阴性对照检测偏倚,重点关注 BMI、维生素 D 和 LDL 胆固醇。
Eur J Epidemiol. 2024 May;39(5):451-465. doi: 10.1007/s10654-024-01113-9. Epub 2024 May 25.
5
Assessing causal links between age at menarche and adolescent mental health: a Mendelian randomisation study.评估初潮年龄与青少年心理健康之间的因果关系:一项孟德尔随机化研究。
BMC Med. 2024 Apr 12;22(1):155. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03361-8.
6
Causal Estimation of Long-term Intervention Cost-effectiveness Using Genetic Instrumental Variables: An Application to Cancer.利用遗传工具变量进行长期干预成本效益的因果估计:在癌症中的应用。
Med Decis Making. 2024 Apr;44(3):283-295. doi: 10.1177/0272989X241232607. Epub 2024 Mar 1.
7
Integrating multiple lines of evidence to assess the effects of maternal BMI on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes.整合多条证据线索以评估孕妇体重指数对妊娠及围产期结局的影响。
BMC Med. 2024 Jan 29;22(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-03167-0.
8
Maternal prenatal cholesterol levels predict offspring weight trajectories during childhood in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study.母亲产前胆固醇水平可预测挪威母亲、父亲和儿童队列研究中儿童期后代体重轨迹。
BMC Med. 2023 Feb 6;21(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-02742-9.
9
Effects of hydrometeorological and other factors on SARS-CoV-2 reproduction number in three contiguous countries of tropical Andean South America: a spatiotemporally disaggregated time series analysis.水文气象及其他因素对南美洲热带安第斯地区三个相邻国家新冠病毒繁殖数的影响:时空分解时间序列分析
IJID Reg. 2023 Mar;6:29-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ijregi.2022.11.007. Epub 2022 Nov 20.
10
Intergenerational educational trajectories and premature mortality from chronic diseases: A registry population-based study.代际教育轨迹与慢性病过早死亡:一项基于登记处人群的研究。
SSM Popul Health. 2022 Nov 2;20:101282. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101282. eCollection 2022 Dec.
一种用于部分校正时间序列及其他观察性研究中残余混杂因素的新方法。
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 May 15;185(10):941-949. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx013.
4
Triangulation in aetiological epidemiology.病因学流行病学中的三角剖分法
Int J Epidemiol. 2016 Dec 1;45(6):1866-1886. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw314.
5
Negative Control Outcomes: A Tool to Detect Bias in Randomized Trials.阴性对照结果:一种检测随机试验中偏倚的工具。
JAMA. 2016 Dec 27;316(24):2597-2598. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.17700.
6
Observational studies and the difficult quest for causality: lessons from vaccine effectiveness and impact studies.观察性研究与对因果关系的艰难探索:疫苗有效性和影响研究的经验教训
Int J Epidemiol. 2016 Dec 1;45(6):2060-2074. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw124.
7
Brief Report: Negative Controls to Detect Selection Bias and Measurement Bias in Epidemiologic Studies.简要报告:用于检测流行病学研究中选择偏倚和测量偏倚的阴性对照
Epidemiology. 2016 Sep;27(5):637-41. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000504.
8
Commentary: On the Use of Imperfect Negative Control Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies.评论:关于在流行病学研究中使用不完美的阴性对照暴露因素
Epidemiology. 2016 May;27(3):365-7. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000454.
9
Parental smoking during pregnancy and the risk of gestational diabetes in the daughter.孕期母亲吸烟与女儿患妊娠期糖尿病的风险
Int J Epidemiol. 2016 Feb;45(1):160-9. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv334. Epub 2016 Jan 9.
10
Causal Inference in Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) Research.健康与疾病发育起源(DOHaD)研究中的因果推断。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:567-85. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033352. Epub 2015 Oct 6.