Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

All statistical estimates from data have uncertainty due to sampling variability. A standard error is one measure of uncertainty of a sample estimate (such as the mean of a set of observations or a regression coefficient). Standard errors are usually calculated based on assumptions underpinning the statistical model used in the estimation. However, there are situations in which some assumptions of the statistical model including the variance or covariance of the outcome across observations are violated, which leads to biased standard errors. One simple remedy is to use robust standard errors, which are robust to violations of certain assumptions of the statistical model. Robust standard errors are frequently used in clinical papers (e.g. to account for clustering of observations), although the underlying concepts behind robust standard errors and when to use them are often not well understood. In this paper, we demystify robust standard errors using several worked examples in simple situations in which model assumptions involving the variance or covariance of the outcome are misspecified. These are: (i) when the observed variances are different, (ii) when the variance specified in the model is wrong and (iii) when the assumption of independence is wrong.

Original publication




Journal article


Int j epidemiol

Publication Date





346 - 351


Robust standard error, clustering, heteroscedasticity, model-based standard error, Cluster Analysis, Epidemiologists, Humans, Models, Statistical, Uncertainty