ArticleMedical care2016
Distinguishing Selection Bias and Confounding Bias in Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Article in Medical care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Unmasking bias in artificial intelligence: a systematic review of bias detection and mitigation strategies in electronic health record-based models.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Pooled it
- [Comparison of different prediction models for the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in the postoperative phase : A systematic qualitative comparison based on prospectively defined quality indicators].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Pooled it
- Massage Compared with Massage Plus Acupuncture for Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Reconstructive Surgery.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Trial
- Fewer poor joint awareness results with cementless TKA compared with the same-design cemented implant.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life and Associated Factors Among Patients With Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Replacement: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial intelligence models for survival prediction in colorectal cancer: a systematic review of time-to-event approaches.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Impact of liver metastasis on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced colorectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Causal Inference With Survey Data: A Robust Framework for Propensity Score Weighting in Probability and Non-Probability Samples.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Aortic valve replacement and mortality in asymptomatic individuals with severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular hypertrophy.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Article
- Adjusting for Selection Bias Due to Missing Data in Electronic Health Records-Based Research by Blending Multiple Imputation and Inverse Probability Weighting.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- TriNetX and Real-World Evidence: A Critical Review of Its Strengths, Limitations, and Bias Considerations in Clinical Research.ASIDE internal medicine · 2025Article
- The evolution of selection bias in the recent epidemiologic literature-a selective overview.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Accounting for extent of non-compliance when estimating treatment effects on an ordinal outcome in randomized clinical trials.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Improving predictive accuracy of early recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Role of postoperative serum tumor markers.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Integration of risk factor polygenic risk score with disease polygenic risk score for disease prediction.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Moderation of Amyloid-β Deposition on the Effect of Cholinesterase Inhibitors on Cognition in Mild Cognitive Impairment.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024Article
- Association of Time to Definitive Hemostasis With Mortality in Patients With Solid Organ Injuries.Cureus · 2023Article
- Promoting Psychosocial Well-Being and Empowerment of Immigrant Women: A Systematic Review of Interventions.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Gender Differences in the Association between Cholesteryl Esters Transfer Protein Polymorphism (rs708272) and Plasma Lipid Levels in Hyperlipidaemic Participants at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) aims to provide patients and physicians with evidence-based guidance on treatment decisions. As researchers conduct CER they face myriad challenges. Although inadequate control of confounding is the most-often cited source of potential bias, selection bias that arises when patients are differentially excluded from analyses is a distinct phenomenon with distinct consequences: confounding bias compromises internal validity, whereas selection bias compromises external validity. Despite this distinction, however, the label "treatment-selection bias" is being used in the CER literature to denote the phenomenon of confounding bias. Motivated by an ongoing study of treatment choice for depression on weight change over time, this paper formally distinguishes selection and confounding bias in CER. By formally distinguishing selection and confounding bias, this paper clarifies important scientific, design, and analysis issues relevant to ensuring validity. First is that the 2 types of biases may arise simultaneously in any given study; even if confounding bias is completely controlled, a study may nevertheless suffer from selection bias so that the results are not generalizable to the patient population of interest. Second is that the statistical methods used to mitigate the 2 biases are themselves distinct; methods developed to control one type of bias should not be expected to address the other. Finally, the control of selection and confounding bias will often require distinct covariate information. Consequently, as researchers plan future studies of comparative effectiveness, care must be taken to ensure that all data elements relevant to both confounding and selection bias are collected.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.