Alshihayb T S, Heaton B
Department of Health Policy and Health Services Research, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Department of Preventive Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
JDR Clin Trans Res. 2022 Apr;7(2):174-181. doi: 10.1177/23800844211007145. Epub 2021 Apr 24.
Misclassification of clinical periodontitis can occur by partial-mouth protocols, particularly when tooth-based case definitions are applied. In these cases, the true prevalence of periodontal disease is underestimated, but specificity is perfect. In association studies of periodontal disease etiology, misclassification by this mechanism is independent of exposure status (i.e., nondifferential). Despite nondifferential mechanisms, differential misclassification may be realized by virtue of random errors.
To gauge the amount of uncertainty around the expectation of differential periodontitis outcome misclassification due to random error only, we estimated the probability of differential outcome misclassification, its magnitude, and expected impacts via simulation methods using values from the periodontitis literature.
We simulated data sets with a binary exposure and outcome that varied according to sample size (200, 1,000, 5,000, 10,000), exposure effect (risk ratio; 1.5, 2), exposure prevalence (0.1, 0.3), outcome incidence (0.1, 0.4), and outcome sensitivity (0.6, 0.8). Using a Bernoulli trial, we introduced misclassification by randomly sampling individuals with the outcome in each exposure group and repeated each scenario 10,000 times.
The probability of differential misclassification decreased as the simulation parameter values increased and occurred at least 37% of the time across the 10,000 repetitions. Across all scenarios, the risk ratio was biased, on average, toward the null when the sensitivity was higher among the unexposed and away from the null when it was higher among the exposed. The extent of bias for absolute sensitivity differences ≥0.04 ranged from 0.05 to 0.19 regardless of simulation parameters. However, similar trends were not observed for the odds ratio where the extent and direction of bias were dependent on the outcome incidence, sensitivity of classification, and effect size.
The results of this simulation provide helpful quantitative information to guide interpretation of findings in which nondifferential outcome misclassification mechanisms are known to be operational with perfect specificity.
Measurement of periodontitis can suffer from classification errors, such as when partial-mouth protocols are applied. In this case, specificity is perfect and sensitivity is expected to be nondifferential, leading to an expectation for no bias when studying periodontitis etiologies. Despite expectation, differential misclassification could occur from sources of random error, the effects of which are unknown. Proper scrutiny of research findings can occur when the probability and impact of random classification errors are known.
临床牙周炎的错误分类可能通过部分牙列检查方案出现,特别是当应用基于牙齿的病例定义时。在这些情况下,牙周疾病的真实患病率被低估,但特异性是完美的。在牙周疾病病因的关联研究中,这种机制导致的错误分类与暴露状态无关(即非差异性)。尽管存在非差异性机制,但由于随机误差可能会出现差异性错误分类。
为了评估仅因随机误差导致的差异性牙周炎结果错误分类预期中的不确定程度,我们使用牙周炎文献中的值,通过模拟方法估计了差异性结果错误分类的概率、其大小以及预期影响。
我们模拟了具有二元暴露和结果的数据集,这些数据集根据样本量(200、1000、5000、10000)、暴露效应(风险比;1.5、2)、暴露患病率(0.1、0.3)、结果发生率(0.1、0.4)和结果敏感性(0.6、0.8)而变化。使用伯努利试验,我们通过在每个暴露组中随机抽取有该结果的个体来引入错误分类,并对每个场景重复10000次。
差异性错误分类的概率随着模拟参数值的增加而降低,并且在10000次重复中至少出现37%的时间。在所有场景中,当未暴露组的敏感性较高时,风险比平均偏向无效值;当暴露组的敏感性较高时,风险比则远离无效值。无论模拟参数如何,绝对敏感性差异≥0.04时的偏差程度范围为0.05至0.19。然而,对于优势比未观察到类似趋势,优势比的偏差程度和方向取决于结果发生率、分类敏感性和效应大小。
该模拟结果提供了有用的定量信息,以指导对已知具有完美特异性的非差异性结果错误分类机制的研究结果的解释。
牙周炎的测量可能会受到分类错误的影响,例如应用部分牙列检查方案时。在这种情况下,特异性是完美的,敏感性预期是非差异性的,因此在研究牙周炎病因时预计不会有偏差。尽管有此预期,但随机误差来源可能会导致差异性错误分类,其影响尚不清楚。当知道随机分类错误的概率和影响时,就可以对研究结果进行适当的审查。