...
首页> 外文期刊>Epidemiology >Selection Bias When Estimating Average Treatment Effects Using One-sample Instrumental Variable Analysis
【24h】

Selection Bias When Estimating Average Treatment Effects Using One-sample Instrumental Variable Analysis

机译:使用一个样本乐器可变分析估算平均处理效果时的选择偏差

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Participants in epidemiologic and genetic studies are rarely true random samples of the populations they are intended to represent, and both known and unknown factors can influence participation in a study (known as selection into a study). The circumstances in which selection causes bias in an instrumental variable (IV) analysis are not widely understood by practitioners of IV analyses. We use directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to depict assumptions about the selection mechanism (factors affecting selection) and show how DAGs can be used to determine when a two-stage least squares IV analysis is biased by different selection mechanisms. Through simulations, we show that selection can result in a biased IV estimate with substantial confidence interval (CI) undercoverage, and the level of bias can differ between instrument strengths, a linear and nonlinear exposure-instrument association, and a causal and noncausal exposure effect. We present an application from the UK Biobank study, which is known to be a selected sample of the general population. Of interest was the causal effect of staying in school at least 1 extra year on the decision to smoke. Based on 22,138 participants, the two-stage least squares exposure estimates were very different between the IV analysis ignoring selection and the IV analysis which adjusted for selection (e.g., risk differences, 1.8% [95% CI, -1.5%, 5.0%] and -4.5% [95% CI, -6.6%, -2.4%], respectively). We conclude that selection bias can have a major effect on an IV analysis, and further research is needed on how to conduct sensitivity analyses when selection depends on unmeasured data.
机译:流行病学和遗传研究的参与者很少是他们旨在代表的人群的真实样本,并且所知和未知因素都可以影响参与研究(称为选择进入研究)。 IV分析的从业者没有广泛地理解其中选择导致仪器变量(IV)分析中的偏差的情况。我们使用定向的非循环图(DAG)来描绘关于选择机制的假设(影响选择的因素),并显示如何使用DAG来确定何时通过不同的选择机制偏置两级最小二乘法分析。通过仿真,我们表明选择可以导致偏置IV估计,其秘密置信间隔(CI)弥补,仪器强度,线性和非线性曝光仪器协会的偏差水平可能不同,以及因果关系和非共度曝光效应。我们提出了英国Biobank研究的申请,该研究已知是一般人群的选定样本。兴趣是至少在学校入住学校的因果效果,而不是额外的决定吸烟。基于22,138名参与者,两级最小二乘暴露估计在IV分析忽略选择和调整选择的IV分析之间存在差异(例如,风险差异,1.8%[95%CI,-1.5%,5.0%]分别为-4.5%[95%CI,-6.6%,-2.4%]。我们得出结论,选择偏差可以对IV分析产生重大影响,并且在选择取决于未测量的数据时,如何进行进一步研究。

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