Publication:

Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction—Having Your Cake and Eating It Two

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2016

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

American Public Health Association
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Spiegelman, Donna, Claudia L. Rivera-Rodriguez, and Sebastien Haneuse. 2016. “Evaluating Public Health Interventions: 3. The Two-Stage Design for Confounding Bias Reduction—Having Your Cake and Eating It Two.” American Journal of Public Health 106 (7): 1223–26. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2016.303250.

Abstract

In public health evaluations, confounding bias in the estimate of the intervention effect will typically threaten the validity of the findings. It is a common misperception that the only way to avoid this bias is to measure detailed, high-quality data on potential confounders for every intervention participant, but this strategy for adjusting for confounding bias is often infeasible.Rather than ignoring confounding altogether, the two-phase design and analysis-in which detailed high-quality confounding data are obtained among a small subsample-can be considered.We describe the two-stage design and analysis approach, and illustrate its use in the evaluation of an intervention conducted in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, of an enhanced community health worker program to improve antenatal care uptake.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

Terms of Use

Metadata Only

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories