Assessing the Impact of Misclassification when Comparing Prevalence Data: A Novel Sensitivity Analysis Approach

Pamela Stratton
In: Epidemiology: Open Access · 2014 · vol. 04(03) · doi:10.4172/2161-1165.1000155 · W27731974
article OA: hybrid CC0
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View at publisher

Abstract

Background: A simple sensitivity analysis technique was developed to assess the impact of misclassification and verify observed prevalence differences between distinct populations. Methods: The prevalence of self-reported comorbid diseases in 4,331 women with surgically-diagnosed endometriosis was compared to published clinical and population-based prevalence estimates. Disease prevalence misclassification was assessed by assuming over-reporting in the study sample and under-reporting in the general (comparison) population. Over- and under-reporting by 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 90% was used to create a 5×5 table for each disease. The new prevalences represented by each table cell were compared by p-values, prevalence odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Three misclassification patterns were observed: 1) differences remained significant except at high degrees (>50%) of misclassification; 2) minimal (10%) misclassification negated any observed difference; and 3) with some (25-50%) misclassification, the difference disappeared, and the direction of significance changed at higher levels (>50%). Conclusions: This sensitivity analysis enabled us to verify observed prevalence differences. This useful, simple approach is for comparing prevalence estimates between distinct populations.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

References (13)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK