ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025
Simulating hierarchical data to assess the utility of ecological versus multilevel analyses in obtaining individual-level causal effects.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating mathematical modelling and artificial intelligence to combat emerging viral syndemics: A systematic review.New microbes and new infections · 2026Review
- Regional disparities in breast cancer mortality in Brazil: a spatial analysis using uncorrected and adjusted data, 2000-2023.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From infectious diseases to chronic diseases: the paradigm shift of spatial epidemiology in disease prevention and control.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding causality, over mere association, is vital for researchers wishing to inform policy and decision making - for example, when seeking to improve population health outcomes. Yet, contemporary causal inference methods have not fully tackled the complexity of data hierarchies, such as the clustering of people within households, neighbourhoods, cities, or regions. However, complex data hierarchies are the rule rather than the exception. Gaining an understanding of these hierarchies is important for complex population outcomes, such as non-communicable disease, which is impacted by various social determinants at different levels of the data hierarchy. The alternative of analysing aggregated data could introduce well-known biases, such as the ecological fallacy or the modifiable areal unit problem. We devise a hierarchical causal diagram that encodes the multilevel data generating mechanism anticipated when evaluating non-communicable diseases in a population. The causal diagram informs data simulation. We also provide a flexible tool to generate synthetic population data that captures all multilevel causal structures, including a cross-level effect due to cluster size. For the very first time, we can then quantify the ecological fallacy within a formal causal framework to show that individual-level data are essential to assess causal relationships that affect the individual. This study also illustrates the importance of causally structured synthetic data for use with other methods, such as Agent Based Modelling or Microsimulation Modelling. Many methodological challenges remain for robust causal evaluation of multilevel data, but this study provides a foundation to investigate these.
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.