Abstract
AbstractOne of the primary tools that researchers use to predict risk is the case-control study. We identify a flaw, temporal bias, that is specific to and uniquely associated with these studies that occurs when the study period is not representative of the data that clinicians have during the diagnostic process. Temporal bias acts to undermine the validity of predictions by over-emphasizing features close to the outcome of interest. We examine the impact of temporal bias across the medical literature, and highlight examples of exaggerated effect sizes, false-negative predictions, and replication failure. Given the ubiquity and practical advantages of case-control studies, we discuss strategies for estimating the influence of and preventing temporal bias where it exists.
Funder
NVIDIA Graduate Fellowship AWS Cloud Credits for Research NVIDIA GPU Grant
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Physics and Astronomy,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Chemistry
Reference40 articles.
1. Song, J. W. & Chung, K. C. Observational studies: cohort and case-control studies. Plast. Reconstructive Surg. 126, 2234–2242 (2010).
2. Marshall, T. What is a case-control study? Int. J. Epidemiol. 33, 612–613 (2004).
3. Lewallen, S. & Courtright, P. Epidemiology in practice: case-control studies. Community Eye Health 11, 57–58 (1998).
4. Weiss, J. C., Natarajan, S., Peissig, P. L., McCarty, C. A. & Page, D. Machine learning for personalized medicine: predicting primary myocardial infarction from electronic health records. AI Mag. 33, 33 (2012).
5. Steere, A. C. et al. Lyme borreliosis. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 2, 16090 (2016).
Cited by
39 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献