skip to content
Dovepress - Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research
View our mobile site

8847

Collapsing high-end categories of comorbidity may yield misleading results

Methodology

(2982) Views  (729) Full article downloads

Authors: Timothy L Lash

Published Date February 2009 Volume 2009:1 Pages 11 - 15
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S4774

Timothy L Lash

Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark

Abstract: Adequate control of comorbidity has long been recognized as a critical challenge in clinical epidemiology. Comorbidity scales reduce information about coexistent disease to a single index that is easy to comprehend and statistically efficient. These are the main advantages of an index over incorporating each disease into an analysis as an individual variable. Many study populations have a low prevalence of subjects with high comorbidity scores, so it is common to combine subjects with some score above a threshold into a single open-ended category. This paper examines the impact of collapsing comorbidity scores into these categories. It shows analytically and by synthetic example that collapsing the high-end categories of a comorbidity scale changes the pattern of effect of comorbidity. Furthermore, collapsing the high-end categories biases analyses that control for comorbidity as a confounder or analyze modification of an exposure’s effect by comorbidity. Each of these results specific to comorbidity scoring derives from more general epidemiologic principles. The appeal of collapsing categories to facilitate interpretation and statistical analysis may be offset by misleading results. Analysts should assure the uniformity of outcome risk in collapsed categories, informed by judgment and possibly statistical testing, or use analytic methods, such as restriction or spline regression, which can achieve similar goals without sacrificing the validity of results.

Keywords: epidemiologic factors, comorbidity, epidemiologic factors, bias (epidemiology)








Readers of this article also read:

Maintenance treatment with infliximab for the management of Crohn’s disease in adults
Management of ocular inflammation and pain following cataract surgery: focus on bromfenac ophthalmic solution
Potential misinterpretations caused by collapsing upper categories of comorbidity indices: An illustration from a cohort of older breast cancer survivors
Specifying exposure classification parameters for sensitivity analysis: family breast cancer history
Computer applications for prediction of protein–protein interactions and rational drug design
Improving regional variation using quality of care measures
Medical databases in studies of drug teratogenicity: methodological issues
Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: the Danish National Pathology Registry and Data Bank
Julie Rovner’s Health Care Policy and Politics A to Z: a review
Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: Aarhus University Prescription Database