[Definition, concept, and practical example of information bias].

Sadao Suzuki
{"title":"[Definition, concept, and practical example of information bias].","authors":"Sadao Suzuki","doi":"10.11236/jph.25-088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objectives This paper aims to elucidate the fundamental concept of \"information bias\" in analytical epidemiological studies. Specifically, it focuses on bias arising from covariates, an area for which educational case examples are scarce, and explains how and why such bias distorts research results. Using a real-world example, the paper examines the underlying mechanism and emphasizes the importance of precise covariate definition in study design.Methods Information bias is defined as \"a flaw in measuring exposure, covariate, or outcome variables that results in different quality (accuracy) of information between comparison groups.\" Based on this definition, we explain how distorted results arise and analyze information bias associated with the covariate \"Study Period (SP)\" in an epidemiological study using human papillomavirus vaccination data from Nagoya City. The starting point of SP differed between comparison groups, with the vaccinated group having a shorter period defined from age 12 years to the first vaccination date. Using the Nagoya data, we evaluated the impact of adjusting for SP, a covariate that meets the definition of information bias, on the study results.Results Simulation analyses showed that bias emerged when SP was used as a covariate instead of age, which should have been adjusted for. Adjustment for SP introduced differential misclassification because the average observation period was shorter in the vaccinated group than in the non-vaccinated group, leading to distortion in the study results. Consequently, the reported odds ratios were distorted due to information bias originating from the covariate SP.Conclusion This study demonstrates through simulation that information bias arises when covariate definitions differ between comparison groups in analytical epidemiological studies, leading to distorted results. Compared with bias related to exposure or outcome variables, information bias originating from covariates is rarely addressed in educational materials, and its mechanisms are more complex, making it less likely to be recognized. Ensuring uniform covariate definitions is crucial for valid analytical epidemiological research and warrants greater emphasis in future research and education.</p>","PeriodicalId":72032,"journal":{"name":"[Nihon koshu eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health","volume":" ","pages":"567-573"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"[Nihon koshu eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11236/jph.25-088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives This paper aims to elucidate the fundamental concept of "information bias" in analytical epidemiological studies. Specifically, it focuses on bias arising from covariates, an area for which educational case examples are scarce, and explains how and why such bias distorts research results. Using a real-world example, the paper examines the underlying mechanism and emphasizes the importance of precise covariate definition in study design.Methods Information bias is defined as "a flaw in measuring exposure, covariate, or outcome variables that results in different quality (accuracy) of information between comparison groups." Based on this definition, we explain how distorted results arise and analyze information bias associated with the covariate "Study Period (SP)" in an epidemiological study using human papillomavirus vaccination data from Nagoya City. The starting point of SP differed between comparison groups, with the vaccinated group having a shorter period defined from age 12 years to the first vaccination date. Using the Nagoya data, we evaluated the impact of adjusting for SP, a covariate that meets the definition of information bias, on the study results.Results Simulation analyses showed that bias emerged when SP was used as a covariate instead of age, which should have been adjusted for. Adjustment for SP introduced differential misclassification because the average observation period was shorter in the vaccinated group than in the non-vaccinated group, leading to distortion in the study results. Consequently, the reported odds ratios were distorted due to information bias originating from the covariate SP.Conclusion This study demonstrates through simulation that information bias arises when covariate definitions differ between comparison groups in analytical epidemiological studies, leading to distorted results. Compared with bias related to exposure or outcome variables, information bias originating from covariates is rarely addressed in educational materials, and its mechanisms are more complex, making it less likely to be recognized. Ensuring uniform covariate definitions is crucial for valid analytical epidemiological research and warrants greater emphasis in future research and education.

[信息偏差的定义、概念和实际例子]。
目的阐述流行病学分析研究中“信息偏差”的基本概念。具体来说,它侧重于由协变量引起的偏差,这是一个教育案例稀缺的领域,并解释了这种偏差如何以及为什么会扭曲研究结果。通过一个现实世界的例子,本文探讨了潜在的机制,并强调了精确协变量定义在研究设计中的重要性。信息偏倚被定义为“在测量暴露、协变量或结果变量时的缺陷,导致各组间信息的质量(准确性)不同。”基于这一定义,我们利用名古屋市人乳头瘤病毒疫苗接种数据,解释了扭曲结果是如何产生的,并分析了与协变量“研究期(SP)”相关的流行病学研究中的信息偏差。SP的起始点在各组之间有所不同,接种疫苗组从12岁到第一次接种疫苗日期的定义时间较短。利用名古屋的数据,我们评估了调整SP(一个符合信息偏差定义的协变量)对研究结果的影响。结果模拟分析表明,当SP作为协变量而不是年龄时,偏差出现了,年龄应该被调整。由于接种疫苗组的平均观察期比未接种疫苗组短,SP调整导致差异误分类,导致研究结果失真。因此,报告的优势比由于协变量sp产生的信息偏倚而失真。结论本研究通过模拟证明,在分析性流行病学研究中,当比较组之间的协变量定义不同时,就会产生信息偏倚,从而导致结果失真。与暴露变量或结果变量相关的偏倚相比,源自协变量的信息偏倚很少在教育材料中得到解决,其机制更为复杂,使其不太可能被识别。确保统一的协变量定义对于有效的分析流行病学研究至关重要,值得在未来的研究和教育中更加重视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书