Eisen E A, Robins J M, Greaves I A, Wegman D H
Am J Epidemiol. 1984 Nov;120(5):734-42. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113941.
The potential for introducing bias in studies of pulmonary function by the exclusion of subjects with nonrepeatable measurements was examined in a cohort of Vermont granite workers followed for five years. At each annual survey, a "test failure" was defined as a test in which the two largest forced expiratory volumes in one second (FEV1) differed by more than 200 ml. "Persistent test failure" was defined in terms of 1) the number of test failures for each worker over the six surveys and 2) the difference between the two best efforts at each survey, averaged over all surveys for each worker. The rate of FEV1 loss was estimated for each subject based only on repeatable measurements. It is widespread practice to exclude subjects from analysis who do not perform repeatable lung function tests. The authors found that subjects with persistent test failure were losing FEV1 at a faster rate than subjects without. The results suggest that the application of rigid repeatability criteria may bias epidemiologic findings by the exclusion of many subjects with accelerated loss of lung function.
在一项对佛蒙特州花岗岩工人进行了五年跟踪的队列研究中,研究了因排除测量结果不可重复的受试者而在肺功能研究中引入偏差的可能性。在每次年度调查中,“测试失败”被定义为一次测试中,两次最大一秒用力呼气量(FEV1)相差超过200毫升。“持续测试失败”是根据以下两点定义的:1)每个工人在六次调查中的测试失败次数;2)每次调查中两次最佳测试结果之间的差异,对每个工人的所有调查结果求平均值。仅根据可重复的测量结果为每个受试者估计FEV1损失率。将未进行可重复肺功能测试的受试者排除在分析之外是普遍做法。作者发现,持续测试失败的受试者FEV1损失速度比未出现持续测试失败的受试者更快。结果表明,应用严格的可重复性标准可能会因排除许多肺功能加速丧失的受试者而使流行病学研究结果产生偏差。