On the nondifferential misclassification of a binary confounder.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ogburn EL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3365922 | biostudies-literature | 2012 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
On the nondifferential misclassification of a binary confounder.
Ogburn Elizabeth L EL VanderWeele Tyler J TJ
Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) 20120501 3
Consider a study with binary exposure, outcome, and confounder, where the confounder is nondifferentially misclassified. Epidemiologists have long accepted the unproven but oft-cited result that, if the confounder is binary, then odds ratios, risk ratios, and risk differences that control for the mismeasured confounder will lie between the crude and the true measures. In this paper, we provide an analytic proof of the result in the absence of a qualitative interaction between treatment and confo ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundResults of bias analyses for exposure misclassification are dependent on assumptions made during analysis. We describe how adjustment for misclassification is affected by incorrect assumptions about whether sensitivity and specificity are the same (nondifferential) or different (differential) for cases and noncases.MethodsWe adjusted for exposure misclassification using probabilistic bias analysis, under correct and incorrect assumptions about whether exposure misclassification was differential or not. First, we used simulated data sets in which nondifferential and differential misclassification were introduced. Then, we used data on obesity and diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) in which both self-reported (misclassified) and measured (true) obesity were available, using literature estimates of sensitivity and specificity to adjust for bias. The ratio of odds ratio (ROR; observed odds ratio divided by true odds ratio) was used to quantify magnitude of bias, with ROR = 1 signifying no bias.ResultsIn the simulated data sets, under incorrect assumptions (eg, assuming nondifferential misclassification when it was truly differential), results were biased, with RORs ranging from 0.18 to 2.46. In NHANES, results adjusted based on incorrect assumptions also produced biased results, with RORs ranging from 1.26 to 1.55; results were more biased when making these adjustments than when using the misclassified exposure values (ROR = 0.91).ConclusionsMaking an incorrect assumption about nondifferential or differential exposure misclassification in bias analyses can lead to more biased results than if no adjustment is performed. In our analyses, incorporating uncertainty using probabilistic bias analysis was not sufficient to overcome this problem.
| S-EPMC4477528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To investigate the ability of the propensity score (PS) to reduce confounding bias in the presence of nondifferential misclassification of treatment, using simulations. METHODS:Using an example from the pregnancy medication safety literature, we carried out simulations to quantify the effect of nondifferential misclassification of treatment under varying scenarios of sensitivity and specificity, exposure prevalence (10%, 50%), outcome type (continuous and binary), true outcome (null and increased risk), confounding direction, and different PS applications (matching, stratification, weighting, regression), and obtained measures of bias and 95% confidence interval coverage. RESULTS:All methods were subject to substantial bias toward the null due to nondifferential exposure misclassification (range: 0%-47% for 50% exposure prevalence and 0%-80% for 10% exposure prevalence), particularly if specificity was low (<97%). PS stratification produced the least biased effect estimates. We observed that the impact of sensitivity and specificity on the bias and coverage for each adjustment method is strongly related to prevalence of exposure: as exposure prevalence decreases and/or outcomes are continuous rather than categorical, the effect of misclassification is magnified, producing larger biases and loss of coverage of 95% confidence intervals. PS matching resulted in unpredictably biased effect estimates. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study underline the importance of assessing exposure misclassification in observational studies in the context of PS methods. Although PS methods reduce confounding bias, bias owing to nondifferential misclassification is of potentially greater concern.
| S-EPMC5854503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Active comparator studies are increasingly common, particularly in pharmacoepidemiology. In such studies, the parameter of interest is a contrast (difference or ratio) in the outcome risks between the treatment of interest and the selected active comparator. While it may appear treatment is dichotomous, treatment is actually polytomous as there are at least 3 levels: no treatment, the treatment of interest, and the active comparator. Because misclassification may occur between any of these groups, independent nondifferential treatment misclassification may not be toward the null (as expected with a dichotomous treatment). In this work, we describe bias from independent nondifferential treatment misclassification in active comparator studies with a focus on misclassification that occurs between each active treatment and no treatment. We derive equations for bias in the estimated outcome risks, risk difference, and risk ratio, and we provide bias correction equations that produce unbiased estimates, in expectation. Using data obtained from US insurance claims data, we present a hypothetical comparative safety study of antibiotic treatment to illustrate factors that influence bias and provide an example probabilistic bias analysis using our derived bias correction equations.
| S-EPMC10144712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background"Single-arm trials" with external comparators that contrast outcomes in those on experimental therapy to real-world patients have been used to evaluate efficacy and safety of experimental drugs in rare and severe diseases. Regulatory agencies are considering expanding the role these studies can play; guidance thus far has explicitly considered outcome misclassification with little discussion of misclassification of confounding variables.ObjectivesThis work uses causal diagrams to illustrate how adjustment for a misclassified confounder can result in estimates farther from the truth than ignoring it completely. This theory is augmented with quantitative examples using plausible values for misclassification of smoking in real-world pharmaceutical claims data. A tool is also provided for calculating bias of adjusted estimates with specific input parameters.ResultsWhen confounder misclassification is similar in both data sources, adjustment generally brings estimates closer to the truth. When it is not, adjustment can generate estimates that are considerably farther from the truth than the crude. While all nonrandomized studies are subject to this potential bias, single-arm studies are particularly vulnerable due to perfect alignment of confounder measurement and treatment group. This is most problematic when the prevalence of the confounder does not differ between data sources and misclassification does, but can occur even with strong confounder-data source associations.DiscussionResearchers should consider differential confounder misclassification when designing protocols for these types of studies. Subsample validation of confounders, followed by imputation or other bias correction methods, may be a key tool for combining trial and real-world data going forward.
| S-EPMC7665993 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Confounding is a common issue in epidemiological research. Commonly used confounder-adjustment methods include multivariable regression analysis and propensity score methods. Although it is common practice to assess the linearity assumption for the exposure-outcome effect, most researchers do not assess linearity of the relationship between the confounder and the exposure and between the confounder and the outcome before adjusting for the confounder in the analysis. Failing to take the true non-linear functional form of the confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations into account may result in an under- or overestimation of the true exposure effect. Therefore, this paper aims to demonstrate the importance of assessing the linearity assumption for confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations and the importance of correctly specifying these associations when the linearity assumption is violated. Methods A Monte Carlo simulation study was used to assess and compare the performance of confounder-adjustment methods when the functional form of the confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations were misspecified (i.e., linearity was wrongly assumed) and correctly specified (i.e., linearity was rightly assumed) under multiple sample sizes. An empirical data example was used to illustrate that the misspecification of confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations leads to bias. Results The simulation study illustrated that the exposure effect estimate will be biased when for propensity score (PS) methods the confounder-exposure association is misspecified. For methods in which the outcome is regressed on the confounder or the PS, the exposure effect estimate will be biased if the confounder-outcome association is misspecified. In the empirical data example, correct specification of the confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations resulted in smaller exposure effect estimates. Conclusion When attempting to remove bias by adjusting for confounding, misspecification of the confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations might actually introduce bias. It is therefore important that researchers not only assess the linearity of the exposure-outcome effect, but also of the confounder-exposure or confounder-outcome associations depending on the confounder-adjustment method used. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01817-0.
| S-EPMC9835340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We propose a new criterion for confounder selection when the underlying causal structure is unknown and only limited knowledge is available. We assume all covariates being considered are pretreatment variables and that for each covariate it is known (i) whether the covariate is a cause of treatment, and (ii) whether the covariate is a cause of the outcome. The causal relationships the covariates have with one another is assumed unknown. We propose that control be made for any covariate that is either a cause of treatment or of the outcome or both. We show that irrespective of the actual underlying causal structure, if any subset of the observed covariates suffices to control for confounding then the set of covariates chosen by our criterion will also suffice. We show that other, commonly used, criteria for confounding control do not have this property. We use formal theory concerning causal diagrams to prove our result but the application of the result does not rely on familiarity with causal diagrams. An investigator simply need ask, "Is the covariate a cause of the treatment?" and "Is the covariate a cause of the outcome?" If the answer to either question is "yes" then the covariate is included for confounder control. We discuss some additional covariate selection results that preserve unconfoundedness and that may be of interest when used with our criterion.
| S-EPMC3166439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We consider large-scale studies in which thousands of significance tests are performed simultaneously. In some of these studies, the multiple testing procedure can be severely biased by latent confounding factors such as batch effects and unmeasured covariates that correlate with both primary variable(s) of interest (e.g., treatment variable, phenotype) and the outcome. Over the past decade, many statistical methods have been proposed to adjust for the confounders in hypothesis testing. We unify these methods in the same framework, generalize them to include multiple primary variables and multiple nuisance variables, and analyze their statistical properties. In particular, we provide theoretical guarantees for RUV-4 [Gagnon-Bartsch, Jacob and Speed (2013)] and LEAPP [Ann. Appl. Stat. 6 (2012) 1664-1688], which correspond to two different identification conditions in the framework: the first requires a set of "negative controls" that are known a priori to follow the null distribution; the second requires the true nonnulls to be sparse. Two different estimators which are based on RUV-4 and LEAPP are then applied to these two scenarios. We show that if the confounding factors are strong, the resulting estimators can be asymptotically as powerful as the oracle estimator which observes the latent confounding factors. For hypothesis testing, we show the asymptotic z-tests based on the estimators can control the type I error. Numerical experiments show that the false discovery rate is also controlled by the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure when the sample size is reasonably large.
| S-EPMC6706069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Quantitative analysis for the risk of human cancer from the ingestion of inorganic arsenic has been based on the reported cancer mortality experience in the blackfoot disease (BFD) -endemic area of southwest Taiwan. Linear regression analysis shows that arsenic as the sole etiologic factor accounts for only 21% of the variance in the village standardized mortality ratios for bladder and lung cancer. A previous study had reported the influence of confounders (township, BFD prevalence, and artesian well dependency) qualitatively, but they have not been introduced into a quantitative assessment. In this six-township study, only three townships (2, 4, and 6) showed a significant positive dose-response relationship with arsenic exposure. The other three townships (0, 3, and 5) demonstrated significant bladder and lung cancer risks that were independent of arsenic exposure. The data for bladder and lung cancer mortality for townships 2, 4, and 6 fit an inverse linear regression model (p < 0.001) with an estimated threshold at 151 microg/L (95% confidence interval, 42 to 229 microg/L) . Such a model is consistent with epidemiologic and toxicologic literature for bladder cancer. Exploration of the southwest Taiwan cancer mortality data set has clarified the dose-response relationship with arsenic exposure by separating out township as a confounding factor. Key words: arsenic, blackfoot disease, bladder cancer, cancer risk, confounder, dose-response relationship, southwest Taiwan, threshold model.
| S-EPMC1513326 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The presence of confounding effects (or biases) is one of the most critical challenges in using deep learning to advance discovery in medical imaging studies. Confounders affect the relationship between input data (e.g., brain MRIs) and output variables (e.g., diagnosis). Improper modeling of those relationships often results in spurious and biased associations. Traditional machine learning and statistical models minimize the impact of confounders by, for example, matching data sets, stratifying data, or residualizing imaging measurements. Alternative strategies are needed for state-of-the-art deep learning models that use end-to-end training to automatically extract informative features from large set of images. In this article, we introduce an end-to-end approach for deriving features invariant to confounding factors while accounting for intrinsic correlations between the confounder(s) and prediction outcome. The method does so by exploiting concepts from traditional statistical methods and recent fair machine learning schemes. We evaluate the method on predicting the diagnosis of HIV solely from Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs), identifying morphological sex differences in adolescence from those of the National Consortium on Alcohol and Neurodevelopment in Adolescence (NCANDA), and determining the bone age from X-ray images of children. The results show that our method can accurately predict while reducing biases associated with confounders. The code is available at https://github.com/qingyuzhao/br-net .
| S-EPMC7691500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionBoth aging and multiple sclerosis (MS) cause central nervous system (CNS) atrophy. Excess brain atrophy in MS has been interpreted as "accelerated aging." Current paper tests an alternative hypothesis: MS causes CNS atrophy by mechanism(s) different from physiological aging. Thus, subtracting effects of physiological confounders on CNS structures would isolate MS-specific effects.MethodsStandardized brain MRI and neurological examination were acquired prospectively in 646 participants enrolled in ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00794352 protocol. CNS volumes were measured retrospectively, by automated Lesion-TOADS algorithm and by Spinal Cord Toolbox, in a blinded fashion. Physiological confounders identified in 80 healthy volunteers were regressed out by stepwise multiple linear regression. MS specificity of confounder-adjusted MRI features was assessed in non-MS cohort (n = 158). MS patients were randomly split into training (n = 277) and validation (n = 131) cohorts. Gradient boosting machine (GBM) models were generated in MS training cohort from unadjusted and confounder-adjusted CNS volumes against four disability scales.ResultsConfounder adjustment highlighted MS-specific progressive loss of CNS white matter. GBM model performance decreased substantially from training to cross-validation, to independent validation cohorts, but all models predicted cognitive and physical disability with low p-values and effect sizes that outperform published literature based on recent meta-analysis. Models built from confounder-adjusted MRI predictors outperformed models from unadjusted predictors in the validation cohort.ConclusionGBM models from confounder-adjusted volumetric MRI features reflect MS-specific CNS injury, and due to stronger correlation with clinical outcomes compared to brain atrophy these models should be explored in future MS clinical trials.
| S-EPMC10365278 | biostudies-literature