...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Research Methodology >A simulation study on matched case-control designs in the perspective of causal diagrams
【24h】

A simulation study on matched case-control designs in the perspective of causal diagrams

机译:因果图视角下匹配案例控制设计的仿真研究

获取原文

摘要

Background In observational studies, matched case-control designs are routinely conducted to improve study precision. How to select covariates for match or adjustment, however, is still a great challenge for estimating causal effect between the exposure E and outcome D. Methods From the perspective of causal diagrams, 9 scenarios of causal relationships among exposure (E), outcome (D) and their related covariates (C) were investigated. Further various simulation strategies were performed to explore whether match or adjustment should be adopted. The “ do calculus” and “ back-door criterion ” were used to calculate the true causal effect ( β ) of E on D on the log-odds ratio scale. 1:1 matching method was used to create matched case-control data, and the conditional or unconditional logistic regression was utilized to get the estimators ( ( overset{rown }{eta } ) ) of causal effect. The bias ( ( overset{rown }{eta}hbox{-} eta ) ) and standard error ( ( SEleft(overset{rown }{eta}ight) ) ) were used to evaluate their performances. Results When C is exactly a confounder for E and D, matching on it did not illustrate distinct improvement in the precision; the benefit of match was to greatly reduce the bias for β though failed to completely remove the bias; further adjustment for C in matched case-control designs is still essential. When C is associated with E or D, but not a confounder, including an independent cause of D, a cause of E but has no direct causal effect on D, a collider of E and D, an effect of exposure E, a mediator of causal path from E to D, arbitrary match or adjustment of this kind of plausible confounders C will create unexpected bias. When C is not a confounder but an effect of D, match or adjustment is unnecessary. Specifically, when C is an instrumental variable, match or adjustment could not reduce the bias due to existence of unobserved confounders U. Conclusions Arbitrary match or adjustment of the plausible confounder C is very dangerous before figuring out the possible causal relationships among E, D and their related covariates.
机译:背景技术在观察性研究中,通常进行匹配的病例对照设计以提高研究精度。然而,如何选择协变量进行匹配或调整,仍然是估计暴露E和结果D之间因果关系的巨大挑战。方法从因果图的角度来看,暴露(E),结果(D)之间有9种因果关系的场景)及其相关的协变量(C)进行了研究。进一步进行了各种模拟策略,以探索是否应采用匹配或调整。用“做微积分”和“后门判据”来计算E对D的真实因果效应(β),其对数比值尺度。使用1:1匹配方法创建匹配的病例对照数据,并使用有条件或无条件logistic回归获得因果效应的估计量(( overset { frown} { beta} ))。偏差(( overset { frown} { beta} hbox {-} beta ))和标准错误((SE left( overset { frown} { beta} right)) )用于评估其效果。结果当C恰好是E和D的混杂因素时,对其进行匹配并不能说明其精度有明显提高。匹配的好处是尽管无法完全消除偏见,但却大大降低了β的偏见。在匹配的案例控制设计中,对于C的进一步调整仍然很重要。当C与E或D相关但不是混杂因素(包括D的独立原因)时,E的原因但对D(E和D的碰撞者)没有直接因果关系,而E的介导者E的影响从E到D的因果关系,这种合理的混杂因素C的任意匹配或调整都会产生意想不到的偏差。当C不是混杂因素,而是D的影响时,不需要匹配或调整。具体来说,当C是一个工具变量时,由于存在未观察到的混杂因子U,匹配或调整不能减少偏差。结论在弄清楚E,D和E之间可能的因果关系之前,任意匹配或混杂C的调整都是非常危险的。它们的相关协变量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号