Skip Navigation


American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on July 5, 2007
American Journal of Epidemiology 2007 166(6):656-658; doi:10.1093/aje/kwm173
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
166/6/656    most recent
kwm173v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology © The Author 2007. Published by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Invited Commentary

Invited Commentary: Fewell and Colleagues—Fuel for Debate

James Marshall

From the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY

Correspondence to Dr. James Marshall, Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263 (e-mail: james.marshall{at}roswellpark.org).

Received for publication March 31, 2006. Accepted for publication July 12, 2006.

Concern over the impact of flawed measurement continues to nag epidemiology. Early studies indicated that the impact of measurement error is benign, leading generally only to attenuation of associations; more recent research has documented that this impact, especially within the setting of multivariate modeling, cannot be expected always to be benign. It can, for example, be a source of unsettling inconsistency. Fewell and colleagues (Am J Epidemiol 2007;166:646–655) show that residual confounding is especially persistent in the presence of multivariate confounding.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.:

The Impact of Residual and Unmeasured Confounding in Epidemiologic Studies: A Simulation Study
Zoe Fewell, George Davey Smith, and Jonathan A. C. Sterne
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2007 166: 646-655. [Abstract] [FREE Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
Z. Fewell, G. D. Smith, and J. A. C. Sterne
Fewell et al. Respond to "Fuel for Debate"
Am. J. Epidemiol., September 15, 2007; 166(6): 659 - 661.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.