Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 May;54(5):367-74.
doi: 10.1136/jech.54.5.367.

Ecological effects in multi-level studies

Affiliations

Ecological effects in multi-level studies

T A Blakely et al. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 May.

Abstract

Multi-level research that attempts to describe ecological effects in themselves (for example, the effect on individual health from living in deprived communities), while also including individual level effects (for example, the effect of personal socioeconomic disadvantage), is now prominent in research on the socioeconomic determinants of health and disease. Such research often involves the application of advanced statistical multi-level methods. It is hypothesised that such research is at risk of reaching beyond an epidemiological understanding of what constitutes an ecological effect, and what sources of error may be influencing any observed ecological effect. This paper aims to present such an epidemiological understanding. Three basic types of ecological effect are described: a direct cross level effect (for example, living in a deprived community directly affects individual personal health), cross level effect modification (for example, living in a deprived community modifies the effect of individual socioeconomic status on individual health), and an indirect cross level effect (for example, living in a deprived community increases the risk of smoking, which in turn affects individual health). Sources of error and weaknesses in study design that may affect estimates of ecological effects include: a lack of variation in the ecological exposure (and health outcome) in the available data; not allowing for intraclass correlation; selection bias; confounding at both the ecological and individual level; misclassification of variables; misclassification of units of analysis and assignment of individuals to those units; model mis-specification; and multicollinearity. Identification of ecological effects requires the minimisation of these sources of error, and a study design that captures sufficient variation in the ecological exposure of interest.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • The ecological fallacy strikes back.
    Pearce N. Pearce N. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 May;54(5):326-7. doi: 10.1136/jech.54.5.326. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000. PMID: 10814650 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Am J Public Health. 1998 Feb;88(2):216-22 - PubMed
    1. BMJ. 1998 Jan 31;316(7128):382-5 - PubMed
    1. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998 Oct;52(10):608-11 - PubMed
    1. Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Mar 15;149(6):577-85 - PubMed
    1. Soc Sci Med. 1999 Mar;48(6):733-44 - PubMed

Publication types