Reverse epidemiology: A confusing, confounding, and inaccurate term

Nathan W. Levin, Garry J. Handelman, Josef Coresh, Friedrich K. Port, George Kaysen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

55 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The term "reverse epidemiology" has been proposed to address the apparent different relationship between numerous risk factors and outcomes among dialysis patients: thus, obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol, and elevated creatinine all appear to be associated with decreased risk. Since this is contrary to the general findings in otherwise healthy populations, some kind of "reversal" has been suggested, that would be contrary to classical epidemiology. The authors describe several faults to this conception. The rules of epidemiology have not been reversed in dialysis patients. In fact, the complexity of the population implies a greater need for attention to the distinction between association and causation and the importance of confounding and bias. In particular existing subclinical and clinical disease which is very common among dialysis patients can change associations so drastically that they are dominated by different causal pathways than those seen in the general population. For example, lower cholesterol is a better marker of poor health than of a healthy diet and thus is associated with different outcomes. To the extent the term reverse epidemiology implies either epidemiology or biology is different in dialysis patients it can be misleading and detrimental. The differences between risk factors in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and other individuals are surely important, but can themselves be the basis of excellent epidemiology, applied with the classic rules developed for this discipline with the goal of uncovering causal association and hypotheses to be tested in clinical trials.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)586-592
Number of pages7
JournalSeminars in Dialysis
Volume20
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2007

Fingerprint

Epidemiology
Dialysis
Population
Hypercholesterolemia
Causality
Chronic Kidney Failure
Creatinine
Obesity
Cholesterol
Clinical Trials
Hypertension
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nephrology

Cite this

Reverse epidemiology : A confusing, confounding, and inaccurate term. / Levin, Nathan W.; Handelman, Garry J.; Coresh, Josef; Port, Friedrich K.; Kaysen, George.

In: Seminars in Dialysis, Vol. 20, No. 6, 11.2007, p. 586-592.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Levin, Nathan W. ; Handelman, Garry J. ; Coresh, Josef ; Port, Friedrich K. ; Kaysen, George. / Reverse epidemiology : A confusing, confounding, and inaccurate term. In: Seminars in Dialysis. 2007 ; Vol. 20, No. 6. pp. 586-592.
@article{b27a7ad9d7a14e548d058f9f513fb03e,
title = "Reverse epidemiology: A confusing, confounding, and inaccurate term",
abstract = "The term {"}reverse epidemiology{"} has been proposed to address the apparent different relationship between numerous risk factors and outcomes among dialysis patients: thus, obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol, and elevated creatinine all appear to be associated with decreased risk. Since this is contrary to the general findings in otherwise healthy populations, some kind of {"}reversal{"} has been suggested, that would be contrary to classical epidemiology. The authors describe several faults to this conception. The rules of epidemiology have not been reversed in dialysis patients. In fact, the complexity of the population implies a greater need for attention to the distinction between association and causation and the importance of confounding and bias. In particular existing subclinical and clinical disease which is very common among dialysis patients can change associations so drastically that they are dominated by different causal pathways than those seen in the general population. For example, lower cholesterol is a better marker of poor health than of a healthy diet and thus is associated with different outcomes. To the extent the term reverse epidemiology implies either epidemiology or biology is different in dialysis patients it can be misleading and detrimental. The differences between risk factors in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and other individuals are surely important, but can themselves be the basis of excellent epidemiology, applied with the classic rules developed for this discipline with the goal of uncovering causal association and hypotheses to be tested in clinical trials.",
author = "Levin, {Nathan W.} and Handelman, {Garry J.} and Josef Coresh and Port, {Friedrich K.} and George Kaysen",
year = "2007",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1111/j.1525-139X.2007.00366.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "586--592",
journal = "Seminars in Dialysis",
issn = "0894-0959",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reverse epidemiology

T2 - A confusing, confounding, and inaccurate term

AU - Levin, Nathan W.

AU - Handelman, Garry J.

AU - Coresh, Josef

AU - Port, Friedrich K.

AU - Kaysen, George

PY - 2007/11

Y1 - 2007/11

N2 - The term "reverse epidemiology" has been proposed to address the apparent different relationship between numerous risk factors and outcomes among dialysis patients: thus, obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol, and elevated creatinine all appear to be associated with decreased risk. Since this is contrary to the general findings in otherwise healthy populations, some kind of "reversal" has been suggested, that would be contrary to classical epidemiology. The authors describe several faults to this conception. The rules of epidemiology have not been reversed in dialysis patients. In fact, the complexity of the population implies a greater need for attention to the distinction between association and causation and the importance of confounding and bias. In particular existing subclinical and clinical disease which is very common among dialysis patients can change associations so drastically that they are dominated by different causal pathways than those seen in the general population. For example, lower cholesterol is a better marker of poor health than of a healthy diet and thus is associated with different outcomes. To the extent the term reverse epidemiology implies either epidemiology or biology is different in dialysis patients it can be misleading and detrimental. The differences between risk factors in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and other individuals are surely important, but can themselves be the basis of excellent epidemiology, applied with the classic rules developed for this discipline with the goal of uncovering causal association and hypotheses to be tested in clinical trials.

AB - The term "reverse epidemiology" has been proposed to address the apparent different relationship between numerous risk factors and outcomes among dialysis patients: thus, obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol, and elevated creatinine all appear to be associated with decreased risk. Since this is contrary to the general findings in otherwise healthy populations, some kind of "reversal" has been suggested, that would be contrary to classical epidemiology. The authors describe several faults to this conception. The rules of epidemiology have not been reversed in dialysis patients. In fact, the complexity of the population implies a greater need for attention to the distinction between association and causation and the importance of confounding and bias. In particular existing subclinical and clinical disease which is very common among dialysis patients can change associations so drastically that they are dominated by different causal pathways than those seen in the general population. For example, lower cholesterol is a better marker of poor health than of a healthy diet and thus is associated with different outcomes. To the extent the term reverse epidemiology implies either epidemiology or biology is different in dialysis patients it can be misleading and detrimental. The differences between risk factors in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and other individuals are surely important, but can themselves be the basis of excellent epidemiology, applied with the classic rules developed for this discipline with the goal of uncovering causal association and hypotheses to be tested in clinical trials.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35948947403&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35948947403&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2007.00366.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2007.00366.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 17991209

AN - SCOPUS:35948947403

VL - 20

SP - 586

EP - 592

JO - Seminars in Dialysis

JF - Seminars in Dialysis

SN - 0894-0959

IS - 6

ER -