The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Table 2 Fallacy: Presenting and Interpreting Confounder and Modifier Coefficients
Open accessAbstract
It is common to present multiple adjusted effect estimates from a single model in a single table. For example, a table might show odds ratios for one or more exposures and also for several confounders from a single logistic regression. This can lead to mistaken interpretations of these estimates. We use causal diagrams to display the sources of the problems. Presentation of exposure and confounder effect estimates from a single model may lead to several interpretative difficulties, inviting confusion of direct-effect estimates with total-effect estimates for covariates in the model. These effect estimates may also be confounded even though the effect estimate for the main exposure is not confounded. Interpretation of these effect estimates is further complicated by heterogeneity (variation, modification) of the exposure effect measure across covariate levels. We offer suggestions to limit potential misunderstandings when multiple effect estimates are presented, including precise distinction between total and direct effect measures from a single model, and use of multiple models tailored to yield total-effect estimates for covariates.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“After controlling for gender and age as potential confounding factors, independent associations between the outcome variables of burnout as well as anxiety/depression and the explanatory variables (i.e., ALTs, psychological flexibility) were examined [58].”
From The mediating role of psychological flexibility in the association of autistic-like traits with burnout and depression in medical students during clinical clerkships in Japan: a university-based cross-sectional study (2023) · cites this paper as [58]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Elements of Statistical Learning
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7 · Cited by 25,970
Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author)
Breiman, L. (2001) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1009213726 · Cited by 4,340
Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions for Heart Disease in Eight U.S. Counties
Schwartz, J. D. (1999) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-199901000-00005 · Cited by 3,045
Causal diagrams for empirical research
PEARL, J. (1995) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/82.4.669 · Cited by 2,355 · cited 1×
“Model 1 then remains valid for obtaining an unbiased estimate of the total effect of HIV on the log odds of stroke; that is, under model 1, β1 retains its interpretation as the total effect of HIV, as it did under Figure 1, because smoking and age satisfy the back-door criterion for sufficiency for confounding control…”
BackgroundIdentifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects
Robins, J. M., & Greenland, S. (1992) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-199203000-00013 · Cited by 1,793
Self-citationHernan, M. A. (2002) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/155.2.176 · Cited by 1,445
Statistical modeling: The two cultures
Breiman, L. (2001) · Cited by 1,314
Dose-Response and Trend Analysis in Epidemiology
Greenland, S. (1995) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-199507000-00005 · Cited by 1,086
Self-citationConfounding and Collapsibility in Causal Inference
Greenland, S., Pearl, J., & Robins, J. M. (1999) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1009211805 · Cited by 933 · cited 3×
“represent changes in the log odds of the outcome) and we assume the outcome is uncommon at all covariate levels to avoid complications arising from noncollapsibility of odds ratios (9, 10).”
BackgroundSelf-citationQuantifying Biases in Causal Models: Classical Confounding vs Collider-Stratification Bias
Greenland, S. (2003) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/01.ede.0000042804.12056.6c · Cited by 810
Self-citationOdds Ratios for Mediation Analysis for a Dichotomous Outcome
VanderWeele, T. J., & Vansteelandt, S. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq332 · Cited by 809
Marginal Structural Models for the Estimation of Direct and Indirect Effects
VanderWeele, T. J. (2009) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e31818f69ce · Cited by 583
Fallibility in estimating direct effects
Cole, S. R., & Hernán, M. A. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.163 · Cited by 548
Generalizing evidence from randomized clinical trials to target populations: The ACTG 320 trial.
Cole, S., & Stuart, E. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq084 · Cited by 535
On the distinction between interaction and effect modification
VanderWeele, T. J. (2009) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181ba333c · Cited by 450
Invited Commentary: Positivity in Practice
Westreich, D. J., & Cole, S. R. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwp436 · Cited by 446
Self-citationData, Design, and Background Knowledge in Etiologic Inference
Robins, J. M. (2001) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-200105000-00011 · Cited by 358
A Procedure to Tabulate and Plot Results after Flexible Modeling of a Quantitative Covariate
Orsini, N., & Greenland, S. (2011) · The Stata Journal Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x1101100101 · Cited by 321
Self-citationSplines for Trend Analysis and Continuous Confounder Control
Howe, C. J., Cole, S. R., Westreich, D. J., Greenland, S., Napravnik, S., & Eron, J. J. (2011) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e31823029dd · Cited by 189
Self-citationVanderWeele, T. J., & Knol, M. J. (2011) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-154-10-201105170-00008 · Cited by 152
Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and their Cures
Shrout, P. E., Keyes, K. M., & Ornstein, K. A. (2010) · Cited by 147
Adjustments and their Consequences-Collapsibility Analysis using Graphical Models
Greenland, S., & Pearl, J. (2011) · International Statistical Review · doi:10.1111/j.1751-5823.2011.00158.x · Cited by 91
Self-citationAlternative Graphical Causal Models and the Identification of Direct E!ects
Robins, J. M., & Richardson, T. S. (2010) · Cited by 78
The interpretation of multiplicative‐model parameters as standardized parameters
Greenland, S., & Maldonado, G. (1994) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780131002 · Cited by 56
Self-citationWork-related Violence and Incident Use of Psychotropics
Madsen, I. E. H., Burr, H., Diderichsen, F., Pejtersen, J. H., Borritz, M., Bjørner, J. B., & Rugulies, R. (2011) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwr259 · Cited by 42
VanderWeele, T. J., & Staudt, N. C. (2011) · Law Probability and Risk · doi:10.1093/lpr/mgr019 · Cited by 24
Invited Commentary: Decomposing with a Lot of Supposing
Kaufman, J. S. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq329 · Cited by 23
Commentary: Gilding the black box
Kaufman, J. S. (2009) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyp163 · Cited by 14
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tennant, P. W. G., Murray, E. J., Arnold, K. F., Berrie, L., Fox, M. P., Gadd, S. C., Harrison, W. J., Keeble, C. M., Ranker, L. R., Textor, J. C., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyaa213 · Cited by 1,065
“This is exemplified by the ‘Table 2 fallacy’, which occurs when the coefficients for two or more ‘risk factors’ in a multivariable regression model are (mistakenly) interpreted as estimates for meaningful causal effects.(8) Causal inference approaches, such as the potential outcomes framework, promote greater transpar…”
BackgroundLederer, D. J., Bell, S. C., Branson, R. D., Chalmers, J. D., Marshall, R., Maslove, D. M., Ost, D. E., Punjabi, N. M., Schatz, M., Smyth, A. R., et al. (2019) · Annals of the American Thoracic Society · doi:10.1513/annalsats.201808-564ps · Cited by 715
The C-Word: Scientific Euphemisms Do Not Improve Causal Inference From Observational Data
Hernán, M. Á. (2018) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304337 · Cited by 570
Ssentongo, P., Ssentongo, A. E., Heilbrunn, E. S., Ba, D. M., & Chinchilli, V. M. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0238215 · Cited by 557
“[51] From a causal inference perspective, this is a significant source of bias and could affect the interpretation of the results in causal terms.”
Backgroundperformance: Assessment of Regression Models Performance
Lüdecke, D., Makowski, D., Ben‐Shachar, M. S., Patil, I., Waggoner, P., Wiernik, B. M., & Thériault, R. (2019) · doi:10.32614/cran.package.performance · Cited by 512
Metadata
- Authors
- Westreich, D., & Greenland, S.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Westreich, D.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-01-30
- Volume
- 177
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 292-298
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- PMC
- PMC3626058
- OpenAlex
- W2138008655
- Cited by
- 1,276
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 177 · 2025: 213 · 2024: 212 · 2023: 176 · 2022: 192 · 2021: 108 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 4
- FWCI
- 10.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (AI064518)
- Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University
- University of California, Los Angeles
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (P30AI064518)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R00HD063961)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- causal graphs, confounding, odds ratio, logistic regression
- MeSH terms
- HIV Seropositivity, Humans, Mathematical Computing, North Carolina, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Smoking, Statistics as Topic, Violence, Work, HIV Infections, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Odds Ratio, Epidemiologic Studies, Risk Assessment, Stroke
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
