Skip to main content

Overt Bias in Observational Studies

  • Chapter
  • 529 Accesses

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Statistics ((SSS))

Abstract

An observational study is biased if the treated and control groups differ prior to treatment in ways that matter for the outcomes under study. An overt bias is one that can be seen in the data at hand for instance, prior to treatment, treated subjects are observed to have lower incomes than controls. A hidden bias is similar but cannot be seen because the required information was not observed or recorded. Overt biases are controlled using adjustments, such as matching or stratification. In other words, treated and control subjects may be seen to differ in terms of certain observed covariates, but these visible differences may be removed by comparing treated and control subjects with the same values of the observed covariates, that is, subjects in the same matched set or stratum defined by the observed covariates. It is natural to ask when the standard methods for randomized experiments may be applied to matched or stratified data from an observational study. This chapter discusses a model for an observational study in which there is overt bias but no hidden bias. The model is, at best, one of many plausible models, but it does clarify when methods for randomized experiments may be used in observational studies, and so it becomes the starting point for thinking about hidden biases. Dealing with hidden bias is the focus of Chapters 4 through 8.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bishop, Y., Fienberg, S., and Holland, P. (1975). Discrete Multivariate Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Breslow, N. and Day, N. (1980). The Analysis of Case-Control Studies. Volume 1 of Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canner, P. (1984). How much data should be collected in a clinical trial? Statistics in Medicine, 3, 423–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canner, P. (1991). Covariate adjustment of treatment effects in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 12, 359–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G. (1957). The analysis of covariance. Biometrics, 13, 261–281.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G. (1965). The planning of observational studies of human populations (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 128, 134–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G. (1968). The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 24, 205–213.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G. and Rubin, D.B. (1973). Controlling bias in observational studies: A review. Sankya, Series A, 35, 417–446.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, P. (1979). The evolving case-control study. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 32, 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J., Hoffer, T., and Kilgore, S. (1982). Cognitive outcomes in public and private schools. Sociology of Education, 55, 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornfield, J. (1951). A method of estimating comparative rates from clinical data: Applications to cancer of the lung, breast and cervix. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 11, 1269–1275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D.R. (1970). The Analysis of Binary Data. London: Methuen.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D.R. (1958). The Planning of Experiments. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleiss, J. (1981). Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gastwirth, J. (1988). Statistical Reasoning in Law and Public Policy. New York: Academic Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberger, A. and Cain, G. (1982). The causal analysis of cognitive outcomes in the Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore report. Sociology of Education, 55, 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhouse, S. (1982). Cornfield’s contributions to epidemiology. Biometrics, 38S, 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. (1979). Choosing a parameter for 2 x 2 table or 2 x 2 x 2 table analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology, 109, 362–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, P. and Rubin, D. (1988). Causal inference in retrospective studies. Evaluation Review, 12, 203–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitagawa, E. (1964). Standardized comparisons in population research. Demography, 1, 296–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinbaum, D., Kupper, L., and Morgenstern, H. (1982). Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantel, N. (1973). Synthetic retrospective studies. Biometrics, 29, 479–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mantel, N. and Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, D., Saah, A., Silberg, S., Owens, W., Roberts, M., and Saah, M. (1982). Lead absorption in children of employees in a lead related industry. American Journal of Epidemiology, 115, 549–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosteller, F. and Tukey, J. (1977). Data Analysis and Regression. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1984a). The consequences of adjustment for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 147, 656–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1984b). Conditional permutation tests and the propensity score in observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 565–574.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. (1986). Dropping out of high school in the United States: An observational study. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 207–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1987a). Model-based direct adjustment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 387–394.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1987b). The role of a second control group in an observational study (with Discussion). Statistical Science, 2, 292–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. (1988). Permutation tests for matched pairs with adjustments for covariates. Applied Statistics, 37, 401–411.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1984). Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 516–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1977). Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1978). Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. Annals of Statistics, 6, 34–58.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ury, H. (1975). Efficiency of case-control studies with multiple controls per case: Continuous or dichotomous data. Biometrics, 31, 643–649.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A. (1982). Efficient assessment of confounder effects in matched follow-up studies. Applied Statistics, 31, 293–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A., Jick, H., Hunter, J., Danford, A., Watkins, R., Alhadeff, L., and Rothman, K. (1981). Vasectomy and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Lancet, 13–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, R., Rosenbaum, P., and Carbone, P. (1984). Cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, lomustine, and vincristine (PACCO) in the treatment of nonsmall cell bronchogenic carcinoma. Cancer Treatment Reports, 68, 771–773.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rosenbaum, P.R. (1995). Overt Bias in Observational Studies. In: Observational Studies. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2443-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2443-1_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-2445-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-2443-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics