Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33147614›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2021

Examining the robustness of observational associations to model, measurement and sampling uncertainty with the vibration of effects framework.

Simon Klau, Sabine Hoffmann, Chirag J Patel, John Pa Ioannidis, Anne-Laure Boulesteix

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Simon KlauInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Sabine HoffmannInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Chirag J PatelDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
John Pa IoannidisMeta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Anne-Laure BoulesteixInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.

Funding

Data science tools to identify robust exposure-phenotype associations for precision medicineR01ES032470 · NIEHS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI MANRAI, ARJUN KUMAR, PATEL, CHIRAG J. · 2021 to 2025
$3.5M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES032470
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe results of studies on observational associations may vary depending on the study design and analysis choices as well as due to measurement error. It is important to understand the relative contribution of different factors towards generating variable results, including low sample sizes, researchers' flexibility in model choices, and measurement error in variables of interest and adjustment variables.

methodsWe define sampling, model and measurement uncertainty, and extend the concept of vibration of effects in order to study these three types of uncertainty in a common framework. In a practical application, we examine these types of uncertainty in a Cox model using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. In addition, we analyse the behaviour of sampling, model and measurement uncertainty for varying sample sizes in a simulation study.

resultsAll types of uncertainty are associated with a potentially large variability in effect estimates. Measurement error in the variable of interest attenuates the true effect in most cases, but can occasionally lead to overestimation. When we consider measurement error in both the variable of interest and adjustment variables, the vibration of effects are even less predictable as both systematic under- and over-estimation of the true effect can be observed. The results on simulated data show that measurement and model vibration remain non-negligible even for large sample sizes.

conclusionSampling, model and measurement uncertainty can have important consequences for the stability of observational associations. We recommend systematically studying and reporting these types of uncertainty, and comparing them in a common framework.

Indexed as

VibrationComputer SimulationHumansNutrition SurveysSample SizeUncertaintyMeasurement errormetascienceobservational studyreplicabilityresearcher degrees of freedomstability

Identifiers

PMID33147614
PMCPMC7938511

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.