History of the modern epidemiological concept of confounding

@article{Morabia2010HistoryOT,
  title={History of the modern epidemiological concept of confounding},
  author={Alfredo Morabia},
  journal={Journal of Epidemiology \& Community Health},
  year={2010},
  volume={65},
  pages={297 - 300}
}
  • A. Morabia
  • Published 9 August 2010
  • Psychology
  • Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health
The epidemiological concept of confounding has had a convoluted history. It was first expressed as an issue of group non-comparability, later as an uncontrolled fallacy, then as a controllable fallacy named confounding, and, more recently, as an issue of group non-comparability in the distribution of potential outcome types. This latest development synthesised the apparent disconnect between phases of the history of confounding. Group non-comparability is the essence of confounding, and the… 

Confounding in ( non-) randomized comparison studies FES

  • Tan
  • Medicine
  • 2014
It is argued that it is not always a proper way to define confounding according to the comparability concept and the existence of it should be checked using the noncollapsibility approach as often mentioned in standard textbooks.

On the definition of a confounder

This work considers a number of candidate definitions of a confounder arising from various more informal statements made in the literature, and proposes that a "confounder" be defined as a pre-exposure covariate C for which there exists a set of other covariates X such that effect of the exposure on the outcome is unconfounded conditional on (X, C).

Control of confounding in the analysis phase – an overview for clinicians

This article provides an overview of standard methods in the analysis phase, such as stratification, standardization, multivariable regression analysis and propensity score (PS) methods, together with the more advanced high-dimensional propensity Score (HD-PS) method.

Pandemics and methodological developments in epidemiology history

  • A. Morabia
  • Medicine
    Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
  • 2020

Confounding and collinearity in regression analysis: a cautionary tale and an alternative procedure, illustrated by studies of British voting behaviour

Three empirical examples are deployed to address the potential impact of inter-relationships among independent variables in regression model results and how they are interpreted in the light of prior expectations, with results which suggest considerable problems.

The Confounding Question of Confounding Causes in Randomized Trials

  • J. Fuller
  • Psychology
    The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
  • 2019
A thought experiment is run, the CONFOUND study, and a new account of causal inference in ideal and real comparative group studies is suggested that helps clarify the roles of confounding variables and randomization.

Predicting ‘Who Voted for Brexit’ Through Ecological Analysis – An Example of the Problem of Confounding, and its Resolution

In a recent paper Becker et al. have analysed the pattern of voting at the UK’s 2016 Referendum on membership of the EU, testing four hypotheses with a wide range of variables. Re-analysis of their

[COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY FOR ACCOUNTING OF CONFOUNDERS IN THE RISK ASSESSMENT IN COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON THE BASE OF THE METHOD OF STANDARDIZATION].

Comparison of results obtained with the help of the standardization with statistical methods (logistic regression and analysis of covariance) in solving the problem of human ecology, has shown that obtaining close results is possible if there will be met exactly conditions for the applicability of statistical methods.

A counterfactual approach to bias and effect modification in terms of response types

A hitherto unrecognized sufficient condition to estimate effect measures in observational studies by adjusting for confounding bias is shown and the present findings would be of great use when demonstrating the inherent distinctions between observational studies and randomized controlled trials.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 69 REFERENCES

The history of confounding.

The problems of confounding present their old challenges again in recent applications to genetic epidemiology.

Causality in epidemiology

  • P. Vineis
  • Biology
    Sozial- und Präventivmedizin
  • 2003
Epidemiology has evolved from a monocausal to a multicausal concept of the "web of causation", thus mimicking a similar and much earlier shift in the social sciences, but is both more sensitive to underlying biological models and more prone to a simplification of the causal pathways.

Control of confounding in the assessment of medical technology.

It is given that the decision of whether a recorded variable is a confounder in a data-set must be decided on the basis of subject-matter knowledge and clinical judgement; statistical selection procedures based on significant tests, such as stepwise regression, can be particularly misleading.

Confounding: essence and detection.

In case-referent studies confounding can arise in two ways: a priori confounders are correlates of exposure in the joint source population of cases and reference subjects; also, they are determinants of diagnosing the illness or have different selection implications between cases and referents.

Confounding and Collapsibility in Causal Inference

Consideration of confounding is fundamental to the design and analysis of studies of causal effects. Yet, apart from confounding in experimental designs, the topic is given little or no discussion in

Epidemiologic methods in clinical trials

Epidemiologic methods developed to control confounding in non‐experimental studies are equally applicable for experiments, where the extent of confounding for each risk indicator should be assessed, and if sufficiently large, controlled.

Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding.

A logical connection is drawn between the concepts of identifiability, exchangeability, and confounding, which allows one to view the problem of confounding as arising from problems of ident ifiability, and provides further justification for confounder definitions based on comparability of exposure groups, as opposed to collapsibility-based definitions.

The foundations of confounding in epidemiology

Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease.

The role and limitations of retrospective investigations of factors possibly associated with the occurrence of a disease are discussed and their relationship to forward-type studies emphasized.

Epidemiology: An epistemological perspective

The term “epidemiology” is a source of confusion about the nature of this discipline, which is a medical discipline that deals with large-scale outbreaks of infectious diseases.
...