Stellman S D
Prev Med. 1987 Mar;16(2):165-82. doi: 10.1016/0091-7435(87)90081-8.
The magnitude of confounding is examined in nine case studies of two "weak" relationships: between artificial sweeteners and bladder cancer, and between oral contraceptives and cervical dysplasia. Confounding had little or no influence on the results of any published study. The responsible epidemiologist must always consider the possibility of confounding, no less when associations are weak than when they are strong. Identification of potentially confounding variables is an integral part of good epidemiologic practice. Rarely, however, does confounding itself, especially from unidentified sources, live up to its reputation for introducing seriously spurious associations. An investigator is more likely to be led astray by undetected biases than by pure confounding.
在两项“弱”关联的九个案例研究中考察了混杂因素的影响程度:人工甜味剂与膀胱癌之间的关联,以及口服避孕药与宫颈发育异常之间的关联。混杂因素对任何已发表研究的结果几乎没有或没有影响。负责任的流行病学家必须始终考虑混杂因素的可能性,关联较弱时如此,关联较强时亦是如此。识别潜在的混杂变量是良好流行病学实践不可或缺的一部分。然而,混杂因素本身,尤其是来自未明确来源的混杂因素,很少能像其引入严重虚假关联的名声那样名副其实。与纯粹的混杂因素相比,未被发现的偏倚更有可能使研究者误入歧途。