The Intervention Selection Bias: An Underrecognized Confound in Intervention Research

Robert E. Larzelere; Brett R. Kuhn; Byron Johnson

首页> 外文期刊>Psychological Bulletin >The Intervention Selection Bias: An Underrecognized Confound in Intervention Research

【24h】

The Intervention Selection Bias: An Underrecognized Confound in Intervention Research

机译：干预选择偏向：干预研究中未得到充分认识的困惑

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

Selection bias can be the most important threat to internal validity in intervention research, but is often insufficiently recognized and controlled. The bias is illustrated in research on parental interventions (punishment, homework assistance); medical interventions (hospitalization); and psychological interventions for suicide risk, sex offending, and juvenile delinquency. The intervention selection bias is most adequately controlled in randomized studies or strong quasi-experimental designs, although recent statistical innovations can enhance weaker designs. The most important points are to increase awareness of the intervention selection bias and to systematically evaluate plausible alternative explanations of data before making causal conclusions.

机译：选择偏差可能是干预研究中对内部有效性的最重要威胁，但常常没有得到充分认识和控制。父母干预（惩罚，家庭作业协助）的研究表明了这种偏见。医疗干预（住院治疗）；以及自杀风险，性犯罪和青少年犯罪的心理干预。尽管最近的统计创新可以增强较弱的设计，但在随机研究或强有力的准实验设计中，干预选择的偏倚可以得到最充分的控制。最重要的一点是提高对干预选择偏见的认识，并在得出因果结论之前系统地评估数据的合理替代解释。

著录项

来源
《Psychological Bulletin》 |2004年第2期|p. 289-303|共15页
作者
Robert E. Larzelere; Brett R. Kuhn; Byron Johnson;
展开▼
作者单位

Department of Psychology, Munroe-Meyer Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center;

Department of Psychology, Munroe-Meyer Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center;

Center for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society, University of Pennsylvania;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类心理学;
关键词

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction-Having Your Cake and Eating It Two [J] . Spiegelman Donna, Rivera-Rodriguez Claudia L., Haneuse Sebastien American journal of public health . 2016,第7期

机译：评估公共卫生干预措施：3。用于减少偏差的两级设计 - 让你的蛋糕和吃它两个
2. Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction-Having Your Cake and Eating It Two [J] . Spiegelman Donna, Rivera-Rodriguez Claudia L., Haneuse Sebastien American journal of public health . 2016,第7期

机译：评估公共卫生干预措施：3。用于减少偏差的两级设计 - 让你的蛋糕和吃它两个
3. Poor quality of reporting confounding bias in observational intervention studies: a systematic review. [J] . Groenwold RH, Van-Deursen AM, Hoes AW, Annals of epidemiology . 2008,第10期

机译：观察性干预研究中报告混杂偏倚的质量较差：系统评价。
4. Subject Selection Bias in Intervention Experiments with Socially Assistive Robots and the Impact on the Representativeness of the Population [C] . Toshiharu Igarashi, Misato Nihei, Jumpei Mizuno, International Conference on Social Robotics . 2019

机译：社会辅助机器人干预实验中的受试者选择偏见及其对人群代表性的影响
5. Testing the Efficacy of Interventions to Decrease Racial Bias in Jury Selection [D] . Modjadidi, Karima 2018

机译：测试陪审团选择中减少种族偏见的干预效果
6. Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction—Having Your Cake and Eating It Two [O] . Donna Spiegelman, Claudia L. Rivera-Rodriguez, Sebastien Haneuse 2016

机译：评估公共卫生干预措施：3.减少偏倚的两阶段设计-吃蛋糕吃蛋糕两个
7. Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction—Having Your Cake and Eating It Two [O] . Donna Spiegelman, Claudia L. Rivera-Rodriguez, Sebastien Haneuse 2016

机译：评估公共卫生干预：3。用于混淆偏差的两级设计 - 让你的蛋糕和吃它两个
8. Confounding and Selection Bias in Case Control Studies [R] . Little, R. J. A. , Rosenbaum, P. R. 1981

机译：病例对照研究中的混淆和选择偏差

The Intervention Selection Bias: An Underrecognized Confound in Intervention Research

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅