在环境研究中估计因果关系时,潜在的偏差类型以及如何解释它们
Ko Konno1, James Gibbons2, Ruth Lewis3
1School of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK. afuaad@bangor.ac.uk.
Environmental evidence
|September 18, 2024
概括
研究人员确定了121种与环境研究相关的偏见类型. 了解这些偏见对于在环境政策和实践中准确估计因果关系至关重要.
科学领域:
- 环境科学环境科学
- 因果推断的原因推断是因果推断.
- 研究方法研究方法论.
背景情况:
- 在环境科学中估计干预效应依赖于初级和二级研究.
- 进行或报告不良的研究可能导致偏见的估计,误导环境政策和实践.
- 存在许多偏见类型,特别是在健康科学中,需要对环境应用进行全面审查.
研究的目的:
- 系统地识别和绘制与环境部门内估计因果关系相关的所有类型的偏差.
- 为环境研究人员和政策制定者提供潜在偏见的基础理解.
- 提高环境研究结果的可靠性和有效性.
主要方法:
- 使用Bias目录进行了文献搜索,并审查了11个关键出版物.
- 在环境研究中适用于因果效应估计的识别和整理偏差类型.
- 将已识别的偏见分类为与初级和二级环境研究相关的领域.
主要成果:
- 在206种潜在偏差类型中,确定了121种与环境部门相关的类型.
- 组织偏见到七个领域进行初级研究 (例如,混,选择,测量,性能,检测,报告,评估).
- 将偏见分组为二级研究的四个领域 (例如,搜索,选,评估/提取,合成).
结论:
- 对偏见类型的综合整理提高了环境科学家和决策者之间的意识.
- 了解这些偏见对于改善环境政策中使用的证据质量至关重要.
- 建议进行进一步的研究,以正式化偏见定义,可能通过数学分解.
更多相关视频
07:43Author Spotlight: A Novel Setup to Conduct Naturalistic Laboratory Experiments with Real Human Actors in Scenarios
Published on: August 4, 2023
1.9K
09:33Visualizing Field Data Collection Procedures of Exposure and Biomarker Assessments for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial in India
Published on: December 23, 2022
2.2K
相关概念视频
Bias
3.8K
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...
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...
3.8K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
168
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:
168
Causality in Epidemiology
338
Causality or causation is a fundamental concept in epidemiology, vital for understanding the relationships between various factors and health outcomes. Despite its importance, there's no single, universally accepted definition of causality within the discipline. Drawing from a systematic review, causality in epidemiology encompasses several definitions, including production, necessary and sufficient, sufficient-component, counterfactual, and probabilistic models. Each has its strengths and...
338
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
228
The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
228
Cause and Effect
10.9K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
10.9K
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
148
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...
148
