Selection bias: A missing factor in the obesity paradox debate

Obesity

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 625-

  Robinson, Whitney R ^a   Furberg, Helena ^b   Banack, Hailey R ^c  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIRTH WEIGHT; CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION; CHILD DEATH; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; LETTER; MATERNAL SMOKING; OBESITY; OBESITY PARADOX; PATIENT SELECTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SELECTION BIAS;

BODY MASS INDEX; BODY WEIGHT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OBESITY; OVERWEIGHT;

EID: 84895790074     PISSN: 19307381     EISSN: 1930739X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/oby.20666     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Tobias DK, Hu FB,. Does being overweight really reduce mortality? Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013; 21: 1746-1749.
2. Flegal KM, Kalantar-Zadeh K,. Overweight, mortality and survival. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013; 21: 1744-1745.
3. Hernan MA, Hernandez-Diaz S, Robins JM,. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology 2004; 15: 615-625.
4. Whitcomb BW, Schisterman EF, Perkins NJ, Platt RW,. Quantification of collider-stratification bias and the birthweight paradox. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2009; 23: 394-402.
5. Banack HR, Kaufman JS,. The "obesity paradox" explained. Epidemiology 2013; 24: 461-462.