• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of epidemiology >Identification of confounders in the assessment of the relationship between lead exposure and child development.
【24h】

Identification of confounders in the assessment of the relationship between lead exposure and child development.

机译：在评估铅暴露与儿童发育之间的关系时确定混杂因素。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PURPOSE: To explore the best approach to identify and adjust for confounders in epidemiologic practice. METHODS: In the Port Pirie cohort study, the selection of covariates was based on both a priori and an empirical consideration. In an assessment of the relationship between exposure to environmental lead and child development, change-in-estimate (CE) and significance testing (ST) criteria were compared in identifying potential confounders. The Pearson correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the potential for collinearity between pairs of major quantitative covariates. In multivariate analyses, the effects of confounding factors were assessed with multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: The nature and number of covariates selected varied with different confounder selection criteria and different cutoffs. Four covariates (i.e., quality of home environment, socioeconomic status (SES), maternal intelligence, and parental smoking behaviour) met the conventional CE criterion (> or =10%), whereas 14 variables met the ST criterion (p < or = 0.25). However, the magnitude of the relationship between blood lead concentration and children's IQ differed slightly after adjustment for confounding, using either the CE (partial regression coefficient: -4.4; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.5 to -8.3) or ST criterion (-4.3; 95% CI: -0.2 to -8.4). CONCLUSIONS: Identification and selection of confounding factors need to be viewed cautiously in epidemiologic studies. Either the CE (e.g., > or = 10%) or ST (e.g., p < or = 0.25) criterion may be implemented in identification of a potential confounder if a study sample is sufficiently large, and both the methods are subject to arbitrariness of selecting a cut-off point. In this study, the CE criterion (i.e., > or = 10%) appears to be more stringent than the ST method (i.e., p < or = 0.25) in the identification of confounders. However, the ST rule cannot be used to determine the trueness of confounding because it cannot reflect the causal relationship between the confounder and outcome. This study shows the complexities one can expect to encounter in the identification of and adjustment for confounders.
机译：目的：探索识别和调整流行病学实践中混杂因素的最佳方法。方法：在Port Pirie队列研究中，协变量的选择基于先验和经验因素。在评估环境铅暴露与儿童发育之间的关系时，为了确定潜在的混杂因素，比较了估计变化（CE）和显着性检验（ST）标准。皮尔逊相关系数用于评估主要定量协变量对之间共线性的可能性。在多变量分析中，使用多个线性回归模型评估了混杂因素的影响。结果：选择的协变量的性质和数量随混杂因素选择标准和临界值的不同而变化。四个协变量（即家庭环境质量，社会经济地位（SES），孕产妇智力和父母吸烟行为）符合常规CE标准（>或= 10％），而14个变量符合ST标准（p <或= 0.25） ）。但是，使用CE（偏回归系数：-4.4; 95％置信区间（CI）：-0.5至-8.3）或ST准则后，对混杂因素进行校正后，血铅浓度与儿童智商之间的关系大小略有不同。 （-4.3; 95％CI：-0.2至-8.4）。结论：在流行病学研究中，应谨慎考虑识别和选择混杂因素。如果研究样本足够大，则可以使用CE标准（例如，>或= 10％）或ST标准（例如，p <或= 0.25）来确定潜在的混杂因素，并且这两种方法均受制于选择截止点。在这项研究中，CE标准（即>或= 10％）在识别混杂因素方面似乎比ST方法（即p <或= 0.25）更为严格。但是，ST规则不能反映混杂因素与结果之间的因果关系，因此不能用于确定混杂因素的真实性。这项研究表明，在识别和调整混杂因素时可能会遇到的复杂性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号