Investigating and Remediating Selection Bias in Geriatrics Research: The Selection Bias Toolkit
Hailey R. Banack, Jay S. Kaufman, Jean Wactawski‐Wende, Bruce R. Troen, Steven D. Stovitz
University at Buffalo, State University of New York McGill University VA Western New York Healthcare System University of Minnesota System
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
OBJECTIVES: Selection bias is a well-known concern in research on older adults. We discuss two common forms of selection bias in aging research: (1) survivor bias and (2) bias due to loss to follow-up. Our objective was to review these two forms of selection bias in geriatrics research. In clinical aging research, selection bias is a particular concern because all participants must have survived to old age, and be healthy enough, to take part in a research study in geriatrics. DESIGN: We demonstrate the key issues related to selection bias using three case studies focused on obesity, a common clinical risk factor in older adults. We also created a Selection Bias Toolkit that includes strategies to prevent selection bias when designing a research study in older adults and analytic techniques that can be used to examine, and correct for, the influence of selection bias in geriatrics research. RESULTS: Survivor bias and bias due to loss to follow-up can distort study results in geriatric populations. Key steps to avoid selection bias at the study design stage include creating causal diagrams, minimizing barriers to participation, and measuring variables that predict loss to follow-up. The Selection Bias Toolkit details several analytic strategies available to geriatrics researchers to examine and correct for selection bias (eg, regression modeling and sensitivity analysis). CONCLUSION: The toolkit is designed to provide a broad overview of methods available to examine and correct for selection bias. It is specifically intended for use in the context of aging research. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1970-1976, 2019.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
计算机 / AIAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Genetic Associations and Epidemiology · Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
参考文献 42
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 98
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条