Related Experiment Videos

Poor quality of reporting confounding bias in observational intervention studies: a systematic review

Rolf H H Groenwold1, Anna M M Van Deursen, Arno W Hoes

  • 1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. r.h.h.groenwold@umcutrecht.nl.

Annals of Epidemiology
|August 12, 2008
PubMed
Abstract

Insights

Reporting of confounding in medical intervention studies is poor. While most studies mention confounding bias, details on observed and unobserved confounders are often lacking, impacting research quality.

Area of Science:

  • Epidemiology
  • Medical Research Methodology

Background:

  • Observational studies are crucial for medical interventions.
  • Confounding bias is a significant threat to the validity of observational studies.
  • Effective reporting of confounding is essential for accurate interpretation of results.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review observational studies on medical interventions.
  • To assess the quality of reporting for confounding bias in these studies.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of articles from general medical and epidemiological journals (2004-2007).
  • Scoring of relevant items pertaining to confounding bias.
  • Determination of overall quality using an 8-point score.

Main Results:

  • 174 articles were included from 2993 initial publications.
  • Over 98% of studies reported potential confounding bias.
  • Detailed reporting on observed confounders (10%) and unobserved confounders (60%) was limited.
  • Median quality score for confounding reporting was 4 out of 8, indicating mediocre quality.

Conclusions:

  • The quality of reporting confounding in observational medical intervention studies is poor.
  • The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement may improve reporting quality.

Related Concept Videos

Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

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:
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies01:27

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...
Bias01:22

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

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...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

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...
Study Designs in Epidemiology01:20

Study Designs in Epidemiology

Epidemiological study designs are fundamental tools for investigating the distribution, determinants, and control of health conditions in populations. They help researchers understand the relationships between exposures and outcomes, and they broadly fall into two categories: "observational" and "experimental" studies.
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.