Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Biometrics. 1999 Jun;55(2):338-44.

Matrix methods for estimating odds ratios with misclassified exposure data: extensions and comparisons.

Author information

  • 1Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. mmorriss@hsph.harvard.edu

Abstract

Misclassification of exposure variables is a common problem in epidemiologic studies. This paper compares the matrix method (Barron, 1977, Biometrics 33, 414-418; Greenland, 1988a, Statistics in Medicine 7, 745-757) and the inverse matrix method (Marshall, 1990, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 43, 941-947) to the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) that corrects the odds ratio for bias due to a misclassified binary covariate. Under the assumption of differential misclassification, the inverse matrix method is always more efficient than the matrix method; however, the efficiency depends strongly on the values of the sensitivity, specificity, baseline probability of exposure, the odds ratio, case-control ratio, and validation sampling fraction. In a study on sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), an estimate of the asymptotic relative efficiency (ARE) of the inverse matrix estimate was 0.99, while the matrix method's ARE was 0.19. Under nondifferential misclassification, neither the matrix nor the inverse matrix estimator is uniformly more efficient than the other; the efficiencies again depend on the underlying parameters. In the SIDS data, the MLE was more efficient than the matrix method (ARE = 0.39). In a study investigating the effect of vitamin A intake on the incidence of breast cancer, the MLE was more efficient than the matrix method (ARE = 0.75).

Comment in

PMID:
11318185
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk