Table 2 fallacy¶

The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013.

Version: v1 · 2026-09-28 · History
Domain-specific #: 12443
Domain group: Applied Sciences & Engineering
Origin domain: Medicine & Healthcare
Subdomains: Epidemiologic Methods, Causal Inference → Medicine & Healthcare

Core Idea¶

Table 2 fallacy is treated here as the recurring epidemiologic methods identity summarized by this source-grounded definition: The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013. The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013. It is a concept in causal inference. In scientific papers reporting observational studies, people often report both crude and adjusted associations between variables included in a regression model and the outcome of interest in Table 2.

Scope of Application¶

Documented setting. If the purpose of the analysis is causal inference, usually, the variables one would choose to adjust for will differ for each exposure - outcome pairing.
Documented setting. A high profile example was a paper exploring associations between demographic and health characteristics and death from COVID-19, which was used by the French government to define which groups of workers.
Documented setting. The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013.
Documented setting. In scientific papers reporting observational studies, people often report both crude and adjusted associations between variables included in a regression model and the outcome of interest in Table 2.
Documented setting. The Table 2 Fallacy occurs when people seek to give a causal interpretation to the other parameters estimated using a multivariable regression model that was only designed to explore a single.

Clarity¶

A clear use of Table 2 fallacy names the carrier, the operative relation, and the conditions under which the source treats the identity as present. The minimal definition is The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013.

Manages Complexity¶

Table 2 fallacy compresses multiple epidemiologic methods details into a stable diagnostic relation. The source shows both the central mechanism—a high profile example was a paper exploring associations between demographic and health characteristics and death from COVID-19, which was used by the French government to define which groups of workers were deemed at risk.—and the practical consequence—the Table 2 Fallacy occurs when people seek to give a.

Abstract Reasoning¶

Type the carrier. Identify the epidemiologic methods entities to which the claim applies.
State the relation. Use the source-grounded identity: The Table 2 Fallacy is a term coined by Daniel Westreich and Sander Greenland in 2013.
Check operation and conditions. This claim was contested by the study authors, who argued that their paper did not make causal claims.
Demand recognition evidence.

Knowledge Transfer¶

Within the home domain. Knowledge about Table 2 fallacy transfers literally when a new case preserves the same carrier type, relation, and recognition test. If the purpose of the analysis is causal inference, usually, the variables one would choose to adjust for will differ for each exposure - outcome pairing. A high profile example was a paper exploring associations between demographic and health characteristics and death from COVID-19, which was used by the French government to define which groups of workers were deemed at risk. Beyond the home domain. No canonical parent is asserted for Table 2 fallacy.

Relationships to Other Abstractions¶

Current abstraction Table 2 fallacy Domain-specific

Parents (1) — more general patterns this builds on

Table 2 fallacy is a kind of Informal Fallacy Prime

The Table 2 fallacy is a named recurring inferential error caused by interpreting adjusted regression coefficients outside the causal role and estimand warranted by the model.

Hierarchy path (1) — routes to 1 parentless root

Table 2 fallacy → Informal Fallacy

Neighborhood in Abstraction Space¶

Table 2 fallacy sits in a moderately populated region (59^th percentile for distinctiveness): it has near-neighbors but no dense thicket of look-alikes.

Family — Inferential Fallacies & Research Biases (18 abstractions)

Nearest neighbors

Computed from structural-signature embeddings · 2026-10-08