Topic summary

Measurement error in a self-reported exposure

Evidence › Study critique confounding risk of bias effect size disputed observational data Solved Closed

This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 130, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

p.fontaineTL2 Solution21 Feb 2026#6

LJankowiak, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: Measurement error in a self-reported exposure Everything below is what sits behind that. The question about measurement error that I actually want answered is the second one below. The first is context and I have kept it short. Both are stated with units, and I have said what I already checked… Go to post

Distinguishing three things in the measurement error discussion that keep getting used interchangeably: the observation, the proposed mechanism, and the recommendation that gets attached to both.

25 likes in reply to #1 5mo

j.restrepoTL222 Feb 2026#10

Post #6 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.

Measurement error is worth one more sentence than it usually gets, and the sentence is the one about how the number was arrived at.

33 likes 5mo

impurity_tableTL3Analytical chemist23 Feb 2026#26

compounding_ruth, post #19: Post #17 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it. Generalisability: do the inclusion/exclusion criteria narrow the population so much that results do not apply to real people asking about it? This is a fair criticism but requires specificity about which real people and why the difference matters. Go to post

What would change my mind on measurement error is a second dataset collected by someone with no stake in the first. Until then I hold it loosely and I would rather say so than pretend to more.

28 likes in reply to #19 5mo

s.teixeiraTL223 Feb 2026#33

A criticism that would apply equally to every trial in the field is worth stating once and is not a reason to discount a particular paper.

28 likes 5mo

weekly_pinTL2Regular24 Feb 2026 · edited#55

Summarising the measurement error thread so far, since it is long and the answer is buried: the first reply has the method, the fourth has the correction to it, and the rest is people agreeing at length.

32 likes 5mo

ni.kravchenkoTL225 Feb 2026#68

Worth stating the null on measurement error before we explain it: the observation may be nothing. That possibility deserves a sentence and usually does not get one.

32 likes 5mo

a.adeyemiTL225 Feb 2026 · edited#73

c.lundgren, post #44: Everything in post #42 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have. Small methodological point on measurement error: repeating a measurement is cheap and resolves most of what is being argued about here at no cost to anyone. Go to post

That is consistent with mine, for whatever one more account is worth.

30 likes in reply to #44 5mo

KForsbergTL2Member27 Feb 2026#110

Measurement error: I have looked for the primary source twice and failed twice. Either it does not exist or it is somewhere I do not know to look, and I would like to know which.

33 likes 5mo

e.coelhoTL228 Feb 2026#126

weekly_pin, post #55: Summarising the measurement error thread so far, since it is long and the answer is buried: the first reply has the method, the fourth has the correction to it, and the rest is people agreeing at length. Go to post

That is a fair summary of where the discussion has got to.

28 likes in reply to #55 5mo

Read the full topic (130 posts)

This topic was referenced in

Reverse causation in a cohort study of weight and outcomeEvidence › Study critique · 14 replies
Reverse causation in a cohort study of weight and outcome — a second datasetEvidence › Study critique · 131 replies
Coming back to: Measurement error in a self-reported exposureEvidence › Study critique · 27 replies

This topic was closed 60 days after the last reply. Closing is automatic for quiet topics so that a settled answer does not collect new questions underneath it. If you have a follow-up, open a new topic and link back to this one — that keeps both readable and gives your question its own title.

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Coming back to: Measurement error in a self-reported exposure Evidence › Study critique risk of bias observational data effect size disputed Measurement error in a self-reported exposure — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Reading back through what has been written here about Measurement error, three questions…	+23	27	49k	3mo
A well-designed study with a badly written abstract Evidence › Study critique disputed effect size risk of bias observational data Posting this under the heading it deserves: A well-designed study with a badly written abstract Everything below is what sits behind that. Reading back through what has been written here about well-designed…	+117	128	7.2k	14mo
Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect — one year on Evidence › Study critique observational data disputed risk of bias Pinned Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I was wrong about Critiquing an observational claim in a thread last…	+5	9	3.2k	8mo
Immortal time bias in a claims-database study — one year on Evidence › Study critique effect size risk of bias confounding Solved Posting this under the heading it deserves: Immortal time bias in a claims-database study — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. I would like to disagree carefully with the settled view on…	+41	46	3.7k	22h
Confounding by indication, explained with a concrete example Evidence › Study critique confounding observational data disputed On the subject in the title: Confounding by indication, explained with a concrete example Working notes rather than a conclusion. Comparing SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) with SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med ,…	+21	25	21k	11mo

Related topics — sharing the tags confounding, risk of bias, effect size

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect Compounds › Repair & healing peptides TB-500 preprint observational data Solved Closed Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect What changes if the standard account of plausible mechanism is wrong? I ask because I have been…	+14	18	57k	13mo
Journal club: LEADER as the historical anchor Evidence › Journal club estimand number needed to treat journal club effect size Pinned Journal club: LEADER as the historical anchor Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. What changes if the standard account of LEADER is wrong? I ask because I have…	+103	110	8.1k	2h
Semaglutide half-life: where the 165 to 184 hour figure comes from Compounds › Semaglutide semaglutide effect size randomised trial type 2 diabetes Wiki Semaglutide half-life: where the 165 to 184 hour figure comes from — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Putting the numbers in the first post, because a question about a…	+128	145	3k	4mo
BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — does this still hold? Compounds › Repair & healing peptides observational data needs a source BPC-157 TB-500 Solved The question in the title: BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I would like to…	+6	10	3.1k	1d
Preprint servers and what screening they do — the long version Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size needs a source On the subject in the title: Preprint servers and what screening they do — the long version Working notes rather than a conclusion. A preprint question rather than a question about the finding in it. The…	+7	11	26k	4mo