Bias? Clarifying the language barrier between epidemiologists and economists

Anita Natália Varga, Alejandra E. Guevara Morel, Hanneke van Dongen, Joran Lokkerbol, Judith E. Bosmans, Maarten Lindeboom, Maurits van Tulder, Lex Bouter, Judith E. Bosmans, Je Bosmans

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    In health intervention research, epidemiologists and economists are more and more interested in estimating causal effects based on observational data. However, collaboration and interaction between both disciplines are regularly clouded by differences in the terminology used. Amongst others, this is reflected in differences in labeling, handling, and interpreting the sources of bias in parameter estimates. For example, both epidemiologists and economists use the term selection bias. However, what economists label as selection bias is labeled as confounding by epidemiologists. This paper aims to shed light on this and other subtle differences between both fields and illustrate them with hypothetical examples. We expect that clarification of these differences will improve the multidisciplinary collaboration between epidemiologists and economists. Furthermore, we hope to empower researchers to select the most suitable analytical technique from either field for the research problem at hand.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)354-375
    Number of pages22
    JournalHealth Services and Outcomes Research Methodology
    Volume23
    Issue number3
    Early online date3 Nov 2022
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Sept 2023

    Keywords

    • Confounding
    • Endogeneity
    • Epidemiology
    • Health economics
    • Omitted variable bias
    • Selection bias

    Cite this