Bosmana fem at 21:28, 22 March 2023

2023-03-22T21:28:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:28, 22 March 2023
Line 27:		Line 27:
	* Lisa Lazareck		* Lisa Lazareck
	* Naomi Boxall		* Naomi Boxall

			[[Category:Effect Modification and Confounding]]

Bosmana fem: /* References */

2022-12-21T20:46:02Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 21 December 2022
Line 17:		Line 17:
	=References=		=References=
	<References/>		<References/>

			=Credits=
			===FEM Editor 2007===
			* Naomi Boxall
			===Original Author===
			* Alain Moren
			===Contributors===
			* Sabrina Bacci
			* Lisa Lazareck
			* Naomi Boxall

Bosmana fem: Created page with "=Residual confounding= Ideally, in order to account for confounding between exposure and disease, we stratify according to the confounding variable. When the confounding varia..."

2022-12-21T20:44:49Z

Created page with "=Residual confounding= Ideally, in order to account for confounding between exposure and disease, we stratify according to the confounding variable. When the confounding varia..."

New page

=Residual confounding=
Ideally, in order to account for confounding between exposure and disease, we stratify according to the confounding variable. When the confounding variable lends itself to few strata (i.e. gender, which has two strata: male or female), there tends to be sufficient data for the results of the stratification to have sufficient power: lending to an overall strength of inference.

Strata can have a biological meaning or a quantitative rationale. Whatever the choice, the variable of interest is no longer a confounder within the stratum. If the dataset is stratified according to 10-year age groups, then it must be verified that age is no longer a confounder within those 10-year age group strata. If we stratified further to examine for confounding, there would be cells containing little or no data: which would need to be compensated for using modelling assumptions.

Typically these assumptions form a regression model - which will never be entirely correct. The bias remaining is 'residual confounding' - that which remains after confounding has been adjusted for as much as possible <ref>K.J.Rothman, S.Greenland, T.L.Lash. Modern Epidemiology. Third ed. Philadelphia, USA: Lipincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008.</ref>.

=Cancelling out =
Factors may not appear to be confounders if they cancel each other out.

In a (hypothetical) study examining the risk of lung cancer amongst those exposed to silica dust, exposure is found to be a risk factor for the disease. However, if 50% of those exposed to silica dust were also tobacco smokers, while only 30% of the unexposed were tobacco smokers, then smoking appears to be confounding the relationship between exposure to silica dust and the development of lung cancer.

If the exposed are also younger than the unexposed, but the young are less likely to develop lung cancer (regardless of smoking); then the two confounders (age and smoking) are affecting the original association (between exposure to silica dust and lung cancer) in opposite directions. Neither may appear to be a confounding variable; they have cancelled each other out.

It is hoped that situations such as these are rare. Still, while an exact cancellation of two confounding factors may be rare, they will both affect the total confounding within the model <ref>McNamee R. Confounding and confounders. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2003 Mar 1;60(3):227-34. </ref>.

=References=
<References/>

Residual Confounding - Revision history

Bosmana fem at 21:28, 22 March 2023

Bosmana fem: /* References */

Bosmana fem: Created page with "=Residual confounding= Ideally, in order to account for confounding between exposure and disease, we stratify according to the confounding variable. When the confounding varia..."