Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18211676›Full record

ArticleEmerging themes in epidemiology2008

Simpson's Paradox, Lord's Paradox, and Suppression Effects are the same phenomenon--the reversal paradox.

Yu-Kang Tu, David Gunnell, Mark S Gilthorpe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emerging themes in epidemiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

92 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Country of birth and hospital treatment for psychosis in New South Wales.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Nasopharyngeal carriage and macrolide resistance in Indigenous children with bronchiectasis randomized to long-term azithromycin or placebo.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2015
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Language laterality and cognitive skills: does anatomy matter?Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yu-Kang TuBiostatistics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of Leeds, 30/32 Hyde Terrace, Leeds, UK. y.k.tu@leeds.ac.uk
David Gunnell
Mark S Gilthorpe

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article discusses three statistical paradoxes that pervade epidemiological research: Simpson's paradox, Lord's paradox, and suppression. These paradoxes have important implications for the interpretation of evidence from observational studies. This article uses hypothetical scenarios to illustrate how the three paradoxes are different manifestations of one phenomenon--the reversal paradox--depending on whether the outcome and explanatory variables are categorical, continuous or a combination of both; this renders the issues and remedies for any one to be similar for all three. Although the three statistical paradoxes occur in different types of variables, they share the same characteristic: the association between two variables can be reversed, diminished, or enhanced when another variable is statistically controlled for. Understanding the concepts and theory behind these paradoxes provides insights into some controversial or contradictory research findings. These paradoxes show that prior knowledge and underlying causal theory play an important role in the statistical modelling of epidemiological data, where incorrect use of statistical models might produce consistent, replicable, yet erroneous results.

Identifiers

PMID18211676
PMCPMC2254615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.