A sensitivity analysis using information about measured confounders yielded improved uncertainty assessments for unmeasured confounding
- PMID: 18226747
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.05.006
A sensitivity analysis using information about measured confounders yielded improved uncertainty assessments for unmeasured confounding
Abstract
Objective: In the analysis of observational data, the argument is sometimes made that if adjustment for measured confounders induces little change in the treatment-outcome association, then there is less concern about the extent to which the association is driven by unmeasured confounding. We quantify this reasoning using Bayesian sensitivity analysis (BSA) for unmeasured confounding. Using hierarchical models, the confounding effect of a binary unmeasured variable is modeled as arising from the same distribution as that of measured confounders. Our objective is to investigate the performance of the method compared to sensitivity analysis, which assumes that there is no relationship between measured and unmeasured confounders.
Study design and setting: We apply the method in an observational study of the effectiveness of beta-blocker therapy in heart failure patients.
Results: BSA for unmeasured confounding using hierarchical prior distributions yields an odds ratio (OR) of 0.72, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.56, 0.93 for the association between beta-blockers and mortality, whereas using independent priors yields OR=0.72, 95% CrI: 0.45, 1.15.
Conclusion: If the confounding effect of a binary unmeasured variable is similar to that of measured confounders, then conventional sensitivity analysis may give results that overstate the uncertainty about bias.
Similar articles
-
Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.Stat Med. 2007 May 20;26(11):2331-47. doi: 10.1002/sim.2711. Stat Med. 2007. PMID: 16998821
-
Hierarchical priors for bias parameters in Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding.Stat Med. 2012 Feb 20;31(4):383-96. doi: 10.1002/sim.4453. Stat Med. 2012. PMID: 22253142
-
Bayesian propensity score analysis for observational data.Stat Med. 2009 Jan 15;28(1):94-112. doi: 10.1002/sim.3460. Stat Med. 2009. PMID: 19012268
-
Risk factors, confounding, and the illusion of statistical control.Psychosom Med. 2004 Nov-Dec;66(6):868-75. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000140008.70959.41. Psychosom Med. 2004. PMID: 15564351 Review.
-
Quantitative assessment of unobserved confounding is mandatory in nonrandomized intervention studies.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Jan;62(1):22-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.02.011. Epub 2008 Jul 10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009. PMID: 18619797 Review.
Cited by
-
Propensity Scores in Pharmacoepidemiology: Beyond the Horizon.Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2017 Dec;4(4):271-280. doi: 10.1007/s40471-017-0131-y. Epub 2017 Nov 6. Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2017. PMID: 29456922 Free PMC article.
-
Trade-offs of Personal Versus More Proxy Exposure Measures in Environmental Epidemiology.Epidemiology. 2017 Sep;28(5):635-643. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000686. Epidemiology. 2017. PMID: 28520644 Free PMC article.
-
Opium use and mortality in Golestan Cohort Study: prospective cohort study of 50,000 adults in Iran.BMJ. 2012 Apr 17;344:e2502. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2502. BMJ. 2012. PMID: 22511302 Free PMC article.
-
Covariate balance in a Bayesian propensity score analysis of beta blocker therapy in heart failure patients.Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2009 Sep 10;6:5. doi: 10.1186/1742-5573-6-5. Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2009. PMID: 19744338 Free PMC article.
-
Propensity score-based sensitivity analysis method for uncontrolled confounding.Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Aug 1;174(3):345-53. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr096. Epub 2011 Jun 9. Am J Epidemiol. 2011. PMID: 21659349 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources