• W W Hauck, J M Neuhaus, J D Kalbfleisch, and S Anderson.
• Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Franciso 94143-0560.
• J Clin Epidemiol. 1991 Jan 1; 44 (1): 77-81.

AbstractIn the epidemiologic literature, one finds three criteria for confounding, which we will call the classical (marginal), operational (change-in-estimate) and conditional criteria. We define mavericks to be covariates that satisfy the operational criterion, but not the classical criterion. We present what is known about the problems of mavericks for estimating odds ratios and clarify the interpretation of odds ratios. Key results are: (1) omitting mavericks biases odds ratios towards 1; (2) omitting mavericks cannot artificially introduce an effect in contrast to omitting classical confounders; (3) the operational criterion for confounding corresponds to the conditional criterion when estimating odds ratios, but for relative risks, there are no mavericks (i.e. the classical and operational criterion correspond); and (4) the interpretation of odds ratios obtained from standard methods is that of comparing proportions, not of individual risk.

5 keywords...

hide…