ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2019
Simple Sensitivity Analysis for Differential Measurement Error.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 43 papers, 5 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Childhood predictors of religious reading: a cross-national analysis in the Global Flourishing Study.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Childhood antecedents of adult place satisfaction in 22 countries.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Childhood experiences and adult prayer or meditation in 22 countries around the world.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Methods to Address Confounding and Other Biases in Meta-Analyses: Review and Recommendations.Annual review of public health · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: Meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations.Appetite · 2021Pooled it
- Coordinated outcome-wide analytic methodology for multi-wave analyses of the global flourishing study.BMC global and public health · 2026Article
- A cross-national study of demographic variation and childhood predictors of traumatic distress.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- How can the use of different modes of survey data collection introduce bias? An introduction to mode effects using directed acyclic graphs (DAGs).American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Childhood predictors of political voice across 22 countries in the global flourishing study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- What Are We Estimating? Revisiting Standard Nutritional Models Through the Target Trial Framework.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Childhood experiences and adult self-rated physical health in 22 countries.BMC global and public health · 2026Article
- Exploring associations of three evaluative subjective wellbeing measures (Cantril's ladder, life satisfaction, happiness) with 15 childhood and demographic factors across 22 countries.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Prevalence and Predictors of Experiences of Beauty in 22 Countries: An International Assessment of Aesthetic Appreciation in the Global Flourishing Study.Applied research in quality of life · 2026Article
- Sociodemographic variation and childhood predictors of showing love and care for others in 22 countries.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The roots of belonging: childhood predictors of belonging in 22 countries.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Childhood predictors of health limitations in life across 22 countries: a cross-national and cross-sectional analysis.BMC global and public health · 2025Article
- A cross-national analysis of childhood predictors of physical pain.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- A cross-national analysis of childhood predictors of daily smoking in adulthood.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Childhood predictors of social support and intimate friends in a Cross-National analysis of the global flourishing study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of the effects of childhood demographic characteristics on physical activity during adulthood across 22 countries.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sensitivity analysis results are given for differential measurement error of either the exposure or outcome. In the case of differential measurement error of the outcome, it is shown that the true effect of the exposure on the outcome on the risk ratio scale must be at least as large as the observed association between the exposure and the mismeasured outcome divided by the maximum strength of differential measurement error. This maximum strength of differential measurement error is itself assessed as the risk ratio of the controlled direct effect of the exposure on the mismeasured outcome not through the true outcome. In the case of differential measurement error of the exposure, under certain assumptions concerning classification probabilities, the true effect on the odds ratio scale of the exposure on the outcome must be at least as large as the observed odds ratio between the mismeasured exposure and the outcome divided by the maximum odds ratio of the effect of the outcome on mismeasured exposure conditional on the true exposure. The results can be immediately used to indicate the minimum strength of differential measurement error that would be needed to explain away an observed association between an exposure measurement and an outcome measurement for this to be solely due to measurement error.
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.