IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijphth/v47y2002i4p216-224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The history of confounding

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Vandenbroucke

Abstract

L'effet de confusion est un problème élémentaire de comparabilité et a donc toujours été présent en science. C'était à l'origine un simple mot d'anglais, mais il a acquis une signification spécifique dans la pensée épidémiologique par rapport à la recherche expérimentale et non expérimentale. L'utilisation du mot remonte à Fisher. Le concept a été approfondi dans la recherche en science sociale, entre autres par Kish. Le développement du concept en épidémiologie dans la deuxième moitié du 20 ème siècle a été assuré par Cornfield et Miettinen. Ces développements ont mis l'accent sur le fait que le raisonnement sur l'effet de confusion est presque entièrement un processus a priori que nous devons imposer aux données et à l'analyse afin d'aboutir à une interprétation qui ait du sens. Les vieux défis liés à l'effet de confusion se représentent dans leurs applications récentes en épidémiologie génétique. Copyright Birkhäuser Verlag 2002

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Vandenbroucke, 2002. "The history of confounding," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 47(4), pages 216-224, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijphth:v:47:y:2002:i:4:p:216-224
    DOI: 10.1007/BF01326402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF01326402
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF01326402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alfredo Morabia & Thomas Abel, 2002. "The making of an epidemiological theory of bias and confounding," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 47(3), pages 146-146, September.
    2. Russell, Jesse Rio & Kerwin, Colleen & Halverson, Julie L., 2018. "Is child protective services effective?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 185-192.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ijphth:v:47:y:2002:i:4:p:216-224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.