Article thumbnail

Correspondence to:

By Jon Nicholl, Jon Nicholl and Medical Care

Abstract

Observational studies comparing groups or populations to evaluate services or interventions usually require case-mix adjustment to account for imbalances between the groups being compared. Simulation studies have, however, shown that case-mix adjustment can make any bias worse. One reason this can happen is if the risk factors used in the adjustment are related to the risk in different ways in the groups or populations being compared, and ignoring this commits the ‘‘constant risk fallacy’’. Case-mix adjustment is particularly prone to this problem when the adjustment uses factors that are proxies for the real risk factors. Interactions between risk factors and groups should always be examined before case-mix adjustment in observational studies. A ssessment of the effects of area-wide service or public health interventions, or the impact of technologies that are evolving over time, often involves non-randomised comparisons between populations in different places or measured at different times

Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:CiteSeerX.psu:10.1.1.984.7899
Provided by: CiteSeerX
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://jech.bmj.com/content/61... (external link)
  • http://jech.bmj.com/content/61... (external link)
  • http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/v... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.