このエントリーをはてなブックマークに追加
ID 63043
FullText URL
Author
Suzuki, Etsuji Department of Epidem iology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University Kaken ID publons researchmap
Tsuda, Toshihide Department of Human Ecology, Graduate School of Environmenta l and Life Science, Okayama University ORCID Kaken ID researchmap
Mitsuhashi, Toshiharu Center for Innovative Clinical Medicine, Okayama University Hospital, Okayama University, Kaken ID researchmap
Mansournia, Mohammad Ali Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Yamamoto, Eiji Department of Information Science, Faculty of Informatics, Okayama University of Science
Abstract
Purpose
To provide an organizational schema for systematic error and random error in estimating causal measures, aimed at clarifying the concept of errors from the perspective of causal inference.

Methods
We propose to divide systematic error into structural error and analytic error. With regard to random error, our schema shows its four major sources: nondeterministic counterfactuals, sampling variability, a mechanism that generates exposure events and measurement variability.

Results
Structural error is defined from the perspective of counterfactual reasoning and divided into nonexchangeability bias (which comprises confounding bias and selection bias) and measurement bias. Directed acyclic graphs are useful to illustrate this kind of error. Nonexchangeability bias implies a lack of “exchangeability” between the selected exposed and unexposed groups. A lack of exchangeability is not a primary concern of measurement bias, justifying its separation from confounding bias and selection bias. Many forms of analytic errors result from the small-sample properties of the estimator used and vanish asymptotically. Analytic error also results from wrong (misspecified) statistical models and inappropriate statistical methods.

Conclusions
Our organizational schema is helpful for understanding the relationship between systematic error and random error from a previously less investigated aspect, enabling us to better understand the relationship between accuracy, validity, and precision.
Keywords
bias
causality
epidemiologic methods
Note
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
This is the accepted manuscript version. The formal published version is available at [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.09.008] .
Published Date
2016-11
Publication Title
Annals of Epidemiology
Volume
volume26
Issue
issue11
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Start Page
788
End Page
793
ISSN
1047-2797
NCID
AA10761439
Content Type
Journal Article
language
English
OAI-PMH Set
岡山大学
Copyright Holders
© 2016 Elsevier Inc.
File Version
author
PubMed ID
DOI
Web of Science KeyUT
Related Url
isVersionOf https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.09.008
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Funder Name
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
助成番号
JP26870383