Revisiting the Table 2 fallacy: A motivating example examining preeclampsia and preterm birth

Bandoli, Gretchen; Palmsten, Kristin; Chambers, Christina D.; Jelliffe‐Pawlowski, Laura L.; Baer, Rebecca J.; Thompson, Caroline A.

doi:10.1111/ppe.12474

Cited by 33 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These included studies were conducted between 1984 and 2019. The sample sizes of these studies varied from 105 [16] to 2,963,888 [17]. The prevalence of alcohol consumption during pregnancy among different samples varied between 0.2% (China) [18] to 73.9% (SCOPE study) [19].…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Alcohol use in Pregnancy and Preeclampsia or Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

Gong¹,

Zeng²,

Corsi³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo summarize evidence on the association of maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy with preeclampsia (PE) or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP).Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. We included original studies that presented relative risks, odds ratios, or data to calculate the risks for the association of alcohol consumption during pregnancy with PE or HDP. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess study quality. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate the pooled association of gestational alcohol use with PE or HDP.ResultsThirty-seven articles met the criteria for inclusion. The total study population was 4,434,003 women with 170,481 cases of PE and 467,055 women with 41,708 cases of HDP. For all included studies, there was no significant association between alcohol consumption during pregnancy and incidence of PE (OR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.73-1.20), with statistical significant heterogeneity (I2=91%, P<0.00001). Among the subgroup of prospective cohort studies, the pooled results showed that alcohol consumption during pregnancy had a protective effect on PE (OR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.54-0.76), and with no statistical heterogeneity (I2 =0%, P=0.56). The results from the subgroup of retrospective cohort and case-control studies showed that alcohol consumption during pregnancy was not associated with PE, with odds ratios of 1.07 (0.65-1.74) and 1.02 (0.64-1.61), respectively, and with statistically significant heterogeneity. The pooled OR for the association between alcohol consumption during pregnancy and HDP was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.75-1.29), with considerable heterogeneity (I2=90% P<0.00001).ConclusionOverall, there is no apparent association of alcohol consumption during pregnancy with PE or HDP. In prospective cohort studies, an evident protective effect is likely due to residual confounding. Further studies should consider alternative designs such as mendelian randomization, which can overcome some of the limitations of conventional prospective studies.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of the Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Alcohol use in Pregnancy and Preeclampsia or Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

Gong¹,

Zeng²,

Corsi³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this issue of Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology , Bandoli et al provide an interesting perinatal example of the Table 2 fallacy. Such fallacious interpretation may occur in the context of causal modelling when the effect of any determinant of interest is assessed though a multivariable model that includes confounders and modifiers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causal models: Specification, fitting, reporting, and interpretation

Boutin

Joseph

2018

Paediatric Perinatal Epid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 Readers should use caution when interpreting results like these because they may be biased due to what is known as the " Table 2 Fallacy." 5 The " Table 2 Fallacy" is when effect estimates for multiple exposures and their confounders are estimated from the same statistical model, results that are often presented in an article's " Table 2." 5,6 Specifically, the covariates included in the final model of this study are secondary exposures of interest and may be serving as confounders to VRIs and/or antibiotic prescriptions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

RE: Role of rapid diagnostics for viral respiratory infections in antibiotic prescribing decision in the emergency department, by Li et al (2019)

Rankin

Rebeiro

Haddadin

et al. 2020

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revisiting the Table 2 fallacy: A motivating example examining preeclampsia and preterm birth

Abstract: Reporting multiple effect estimates from a single model may lead to misinterpretation and lack of reproducibility. This example highlights the need for careful consideration of the types of effects estimated in statistical models.

Cited by 33 publications

References 28 publications

Association Between Alcohol use in Pregnancy and Preeclampsia or Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

Association Between Alcohol use in Pregnancy and Preeclampsia or Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

Causal models: Specification, fitting, reporting, and interpretation

RE: Role of rapid diagnostics for viral respiratory infections in antibiotic prescribing decision in the emergency department, by Li et al (2019)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About