Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Indirect corrections for confounding under multiplicative and additive risk models.

M H Gail1, S Wacholder, J H Lubin

  • 1Epidemiologic Methods Section, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland 20892.

American Journal of Industrial Medicine
|January 1, 1988
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Investing in prospective cohorts for etiologic study of occupational exposures.

American journal of industrial medicine·2015
Same author

Effects of α-tocopherol and β-carotene supplementation on liver cancer incidence and chronic liver disease mortality in the ATBC study.

British journal of cancer·2014
Same author

Plasma cytokine levels and human papillomavirus infection at the cervix in rural Nigerian women.

Cytokine·2013
Same author

Misunderstandings in the misconception on the use of pack-years in analysis of smoking.

British journal of cancer·2013
Same author

Fecal microbiota diversity in survivors of adolescent/young adult Hodgkin lymphoma: a study of twins.

British journal of cancer·2013
Same author

Risk of renal cell carcinoma in relation to blood telomere length in a population-based case-control study.

British journal of cancer·2011

This study introduces models for joint exposure and confounding effects, offering indirect correction methods for relative risk and risk difference. Incorrect model assumptions can lead to inaccurate risk assessments, as shown with vermiculite exposure.

Area of Science:

  • Epidemiology
  • Biostatistics
  • Occupational Health

Background:

  • Confounding factors, such as smoking, can distort the association between exposure and health outcomes.
  • Accurate risk assessment requires accounting for the joint effects of exposure and confounders.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To define and compare multiplicative and additive models for joint exposure and confounding.
  • To develop indirect correction formulas for risk measures under both models.
  • To evaluate the impact of model misspecification on risk estimation.

Main Methods:

  • Defined multiplicative and additive hazard models for joint effects.
  • Derived indirect correction factors for relative risk, risk difference, and excess relative risk.
  • Assessed applicability to age-adjusted rates in composite populations.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Illustrated methods with occupational vermiculite exposure data.

    • Main Results:

    • Indirect correction formulas were derived for both multiplicative and additive models.
    • Model misspecification can render indirect corrections no better than crude risk measures.
    • The study highlights the importance of selecting the correct joint action model.

    Conclusions:

    • The choice between multiplicative and additive models is critical for accurate risk adjustment.
    • Indirect correction methods offer a way to adjust for confounding but are sensitive to model assumptions.
    • Proper modeling of joint effects is essential for reliable epidemiological studies.