Invited Commentary: Dealing With the Inevitable Deficiencies of Bias Analysis-and All Analyses
- PMID: 33778862
- DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwab069
Invited Commentary: Dealing With the Inevitable Deficiencies of Bias Analysis-and All Analyses
Abstract
Lash et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(8):1604-1612) have presented detailed critiques of 3 bias analyses that they identify as "suboptimal." This identification raises the question of what "optimal" means for bias analysis, because it is practically impossible to do statistically optimal analyses of typical population studies-with or without bias analysis. At best the analysis can only attempt to satisfy practice guidelines and account for available information both within and outside the study. One should not expect a full accounting for all sources of uncertainty; hence, interval estimates and distributions for causal effects should never be treated as valid uncertainty assessments-they are instead only example analyses that follow from collections of often questionable assumptions. These observations reinforce those of Lash et al. and point to the need for more development of methods for judging bias-parameter distributions and utilization of available information.
Keywords: Bayesian methods; bias; epidemiologic methods; observational studies; uncertainty analysis.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Comment in
-
Lash et al. Respond to "Better Bias Analysis" and "Toward Better Bias Analysis".Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Aug 1;190(8):1622-1624. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab070. Am J Epidemiol. 2021. PMID: 33778843 No abstract available.
Comment on
-
Bias Analysis Gone Bad.Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Aug 1;190(8):1604-1612. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab072. Am J Epidemiol. 2021. PMID: 33778845 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
