Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This phenomenon...

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Fine structure in the <math></math> decay of <math></math> Hg and <math></math> Au.

The European physical journal. A, Hadrons and nuclei·2025

Same author

Erratum to "Aligning tumor mutational burden (TMB) quantification across diagnostic platforms: phase II of the Friends of Cancer Research TMB Harmonization Project": [Annals of Oncology 32 (2021) 1626-1636].

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2023

Same author

Crizotinib in patients with tumors harboring ALK or ROS1 rearrangements in the NCI-MATCH trial.

NPJ precision oncology·2022

Same author

Aligning tumor mutational burden (TMB) quantification across diagnostic platforms: phase II of the Friends of Cancer Research TMB Harmonization Project.

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2021

Same author

Corrigendum to 'Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with HER2-amplified tumors excluding breast and gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas: results from the NCI-MATCH trial (EAY131) subprotocol Q': [Annals of Oncology 30 (2019) 1821-1830].

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2021

Same author

Competition between Allowed and First-Forbidden β Decay: The Case of ^{208}Hg→^{208}Tl.

Physical review letters·2020

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Covariate measurement error adjustment for matched case-control studies.

L M McShane¹, D N Midthune, J F Dorgan

¹National Cancer Institute, Biometric Research Branch, DCTD, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7434, USA. lm5h@nih.gov

|March 17, 2001

Summary

This study introduces a new method to correct biased estimates in matched case-control studies with measurement error. The conditional scores procedure accurately corrects log odds ratios, improving epidemiological research accuracy.

More Related Videos

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

Area of Science:

Epidemiology
Biostatistics
Statistical Modeling

Background:

Matched case-control studies are crucial for epidemiological research.
Measurement error in covariates can introduce bias into log odds ratio estimates.
Existing methods may not adequately correct for such biases.

Purpose of the Study:

To develop a bias-corrected estimation procedure for log odds ratios.
To address measurement error in covariates within matched case-control data.
To provide accurate parameter estimates for epidemiological analyses.

Main Methods:

Proposed a conditional scores procedure.
Conditioned on sufficient statistics for unobservable true covariates.
Derived unbiased score equations for Gaussian nondifferential measurement error.
Utilized resampling methods for standard error estimation.

Main Results:

The conditional scores procedure successfully removed bias in naive estimates.
Demonstrated effectiveness in a matched case-control study of prostate cancer.
Compared favorably to regression calibration procedures.

Conclusions:

The conditional scores procedure offers a robust method for bias correction.
Improves the accuracy of log odds ratio estimates in the presence of covariate measurement error.
Enhances the reliability of findings from matched case-control studies.