Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 6, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Assessing the reporting of categorised quantitative variables in observational epidemiological studies
Onkabetse V Mabikwa1, Darren C Greenwood2, Paul D Baxter2
1Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, LICAMM, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. umovm@leeds.ac.uk.
Background:
One aspect to consider when reporting results of observational studies in epidemiology is how quantitative risk factors are analysed. The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines recommend that researchers describe how they handle quantitative variables when analysing data. For categorised quantitative variables, the authors are required to provide reasons and justifications informing their practice. We investigated and assessed the practices and reporting of categorised quantitative variables in epidemiology.
Methods:
The assessment was based on five medical journals that publish epidemiological research. Observational studies published between April and June 2015 and investigating the relationships between quantitative exposures (or risk factors) and the outcomes were considered for assessment. A standard form was used to collect the data, and the reporting patterns amongst eligible studies were quantified and described.
Results:
Out of 61 articles assessed for eligibility, 23 observational studies were included in the assessment. Categorisation of quantitative exposures occurred in 61% of these studies and reasons informing the practice were rarely provided. Only one article explained the choice of categorisation in the analysis. Transformation of quantitative exposures into four or five groups was common and dominant amongst studies using equally spaced categories. Dichotomisation was not popular; the practice featured in one article. Overall, the majority (86%) of the studies preferred ordered or arbitrary group categories. Other criterions used to decide categorical boundaries were based on established guidelines such as consensus statements and WHO standards.
Conclusion:
Categorisation of continuous variables remains a dominant practice in epidemiological studies. The reasons informing the practice of categorisation within published work are limited and remain unknown in most articles. The existing STROBE guidelines could provide stronger recommendations on reporting quantitative risk factors in epidemiology.
More Related Videos
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
07:50A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts
Published on: September 20, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Data Collection by Observations
An astronomer viewing the motion and brightness of stars in the sky and recording the data is an example of observational data collection. A botanist recording...
Introduction to Epidemiology