Redundant causation from a sufficient cause perspective.

Nicolle M Gatto, Ulka B Campbell
{"title":"Redundant causation from a sufficient cause perspective.","authors":"Nicolle M Gatto,&nbsp;Ulka B Campbell","doi":"10.1186/1742-5573-7-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p> Sufficient causes of disease are redundant when an individual acquires the components of two or more sufficient causes. In this circumstance, the individual still would have become diseased even if one of the sufficient causes had not been acquired. In the context of a study, when any individuals acquire components of more than one sufficient cause over the observation period, the etiologic effect of the exposure (defined as the absolute or relative difference between the proportion of the exposed who develop the disease by the end of the study period and the proportion of those individuals who would have developed the disease at the moment they did even in the absence of the exposure) may be underestimated. Even in the absence of confounding and bias, the observed effect estimate represents only a subset of the etiologic effect. This underestimation occurs regardless of the measure of effect used.To some extent, redundancy of sufficient causes is always present, and under some circumstances, it may make a true cause of disease appear to be not causal. This problem is particularly relevant when the researcher's goal is to characterize the universe of sufficient causes of the disease, identify risk factors for targeted interventions, or construct causal diagrams. In this paper, we use the sufficient component cause model and the disease response type framework to show how redundant causation arises and the factors that determine the extent of its impact on epidemiologic effect measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":87082,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","volume":"7 ","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1742-5573-7-5","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-7-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Sufficient causes of disease are redundant when an individual acquires the components of two or more sufficient causes. In this circumstance, the individual still would have become diseased even if one of the sufficient causes had not been acquired. In the context of a study, when any individuals acquire components of more than one sufficient cause over the observation period, the etiologic effect of the exposure (defined as the absolute or relative difference between the proportion of the exposed who develop the disease by the end of the study period and the proportion of those individuals who would have developed the disease at the moment they did even in the absence of the exposure) may be underestimated. Even in the absence of confounding and bias, the observed effect estimate represents only a subset of the etiologic effect. This underestimation occurs regardless of the measure of effect used.To some extent, redundancy of sufficient causes is always present, and under some circumstances, it may make a true cause of disease appear to be not causal. This problem is particularly relevant when the researcher's goal is to characterize the universe of sufficient causes of the disease, identify risk factors for targeted interventions, or construct causal diagrams. In this paper, we use the sufficient component cause model and the disease response type framework to show how redundant causation arises and the factors that determine the extent of its impact on epidemiologic effect measures.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从充分原因的角度来看,冗余因果关系。
当个体获得两个或两个以上充分病因的成分时,疾病的充分病因就是多余的。在这种情况下,即使没有获得其中一个充分的原因,个人仍然会患病。在一项研究中,当任何个体在观察期内获得一个以上充分原因的组成部分时,暴露的病因效应(定义为在研究期结束时患病的暴露者比例与即使没有暴露也会患病的暴露者比例之间的绝对或相对差异)可能被低估。即使在没有混杂和偏倚的情况下,观察到的效应估计也只代表了病原学效应的一个子集。不管所使用的效果如何,这种低估都会发生。在某种程度上,充分原因的冗余总是存在的,在某些情况下,它可能使疾病的真正原因看起来不是因果的。当研究人员的目标是描述疾病的充分原因,确定有针对性干预的风险因素或构建因果图时,这个问题尤其相关。在本文中,我们使用充分成分原因模型和疾病反应类型框架来显示冗余因果关系是如何产生的,以及决定其对流行病学效应测量影响程度的因素。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信