Literature DB >> 15951674

Bounding causal effects under uncontrolled confounding using counterfactuals.

Richard F MacLehose1, Sol Kaufman, Jay S Kaufman, Charles Poole.   

Abstract

Common sensitivity analysis methods for unmeasured confounders provide a corrected point estimate of causal effect for each specified set of unknown parameter values. This article reviews alternative methods for generating deterministic nonparametric bounds on the magnitude of the causal effect using linear programming methods and potential outcomes models. The bounds are generated using only the observed table. We then demonstrate how these bound widths may be reduced through assumptions regarding the potential outcomes under various exposure regimens. We illustrate this linear programming approach using data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. These bounds on causal effect under uncontrolled confounding complement standard sensitivity analyses by providing a range within which the causal effect must lie given the validity of the assumptions.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15951674     DOI: 10.1097/01.ede.0000166500.23446.53

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  15 in total

Review 1.  Adjustments for unmeasured confounders in pharmacoepidemiologic database studies using external information.

Authors:  Til Stürmer; Robert J Glynn; Kenneth J Rothman; Jerry Avorn; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Performance of propensity score calibration--a simulation study.

Authors:  Til Stürmer; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Kenneth J Rothman; Jerry Avorn; Robert J Glynn
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Estimating the effects of potential public health interventions on population disease burden: a step-by-step illustration of causal inference methods.

Authors:  Jennifer Ahern; Alan Hubbard; Sandro Galea
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 4.  The use of propensity score methods in psychiatric research.

Authors:  Tyler VanderWeele
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.035

5.  Propensity score-based sensitivity analysis method for uncontrolled confounding.

Authors:  Lingling Li; Changyu Shen; Ann C Wu; Xiaochun Li
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders.

Authors:  Tyler J Vanderweele; Onyebuchi A Arah
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.822

Review 7.  Instrumental variable methods in comparative safety and effectiveness research.

Authors:  M Alan Brookhart; Jeremy A Rassen; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Is probabilistic bias analysis approximately Bayesian?

Authors:  Richard F MacLehose; Paul Gustafson
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.822

9.  Sensitivity analysis for causal inference using inverse probability weighting.

Authors:  Changyu Shen; Xiaochun Li; Lingling Li; Martin C Were
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 2.207

10.  Causal directed acyclic graphs and the direction of unmeasured confounding bias.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Miguel A Hernán; James M Robins
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.