Annals of Internal Medicine· 2017Q1
Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Research: Introducing the E-Value
- 5,818citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2017year
Short summary
The E-value quantifies the minimum strength an unmeasured confounder needs to explain away an observed association in observational studies, offering a standardized way to assess robustness to confounding.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- The E-value measures the strength of association an unmeasured confounder would need to fully explain away a treatment-outcome link.
- A larger E-value indicates greater robustness against unmeasured confounding.
- The authors propose reporting the E-value for both the observed estimate and the confidence interval limit closest to the null.
- This metric aims to standardize sensitivity analysis for confounding in observational studies.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Sensitivity analysis is useful in assessing how robust an association is to potential unmeasured or uncontrolled confounding. This article introduces a new measure called the "E-value," which is related to the evidence for causality in observational studies that are potentially subject to confounding. The E-value is defined as the minimum strength of association, on the risk ratio scale, that an unmeasured confounder would need to have with both the treatment and the outcome to fully explain away a specific treatment-outcome association, conditional on the measured covariates. A large E-value implies that considerable unmeasured confounding would be needed to explain away an effect estimate. A small E-value implies little unmeasured confounding would be needed to explain away an effect estimate. The authors propose that in all observational studies intended to produce evidence for causality, the E-value be reported or some other sensitivity analysis be used. They suggest calculating the E-value for both the observed association estimate (after adjustments for measured confounders) and the limit of the confidence interval closest to the null. If this were to become standard practice, the ability of the scientific community to assess evidence from observational studies would improve considerably, and ultimately, science would be strengthened.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2017 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Statistics and Probability
Statistics and ProbabilityMathematics