Literature DB >> 19689488

Quantification of collider-stratification bias and the birthweight paradox.

Brian W Whitcomb1, Enrique F Schisterman, Neil J Perkins, Robert W Platt.   

Abstract

The 'birthweight paradox' describes the phenomenon whereby birthweight-specific mortality curves cross when stratified on other exposures, most notably cigarette smoking. The paradox has been noted widely in the literature and numerous explanations and corrections have been suggested. Recently, causal diagrams have been used to illustrate the possibility for collider-stratification bias in models adjusting for birthweight. When two variables share a common effect, stratification on the variable representing that effect induces a statistical relation between otherwise independent factors. This bias has been proposed to explain the birthweight paradox. Causal diagrams may illustrate sources of bias, but are limited to describing qualitative effects. In this paper, we provide causal diagrams that illustrate the birthweight paradox and use a simulation study to quantify the collider-stratification bias under a range of circumstances. Considered circumstances include exposures with and without direct effects on neonatal mortality, as well as with and without indirect effects acting through birthweight on neonatal mortality. The results of these simulations illustrate that when the birthweight-mortality relation is subject to substantial uncontrolled confounding, the bias on estimates of effect adjusted for birthweight may be sufficient to yield opposite causal conclusions, i.e. a factor that poses increased risk appears protective. Effects on stratum-specific birthweight-mortality curves were considered to illustrate the connection between collider-stratification bias and the crossing of the curves. The simulations demonstrate the conditions necessary to give rise to empirical evidence of the paradox.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19689488      PMCID: PMC2743120          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2009.01053.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol        ISSN: 0269-5022            Impact factor:   3.980


  30 in total

1.  Fallibility in estimating direct effects.

Authors:  Stephen R Cole; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Invited commentary: what's so bad about curves crossing anyway?

Authors:  Mark A Klebanoff; Kenneth C Schoendorf
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2004-08-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Theory of obstetrics: the fetuses-at-risk approach as a causal paradigm.

Authors:  K S Joseph
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Can       Date:  2004-11

4.  Improved estimation of controlled direct effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding of intermediate variables.

Authors:  Sol Kaufman; Jay S Kaufman; Richard F MacLehose; Sander Greenland; Charles Poole
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Invited commentary: simple models for a complicated reality.

Authors:  Enrique F Schisterman; Sonia Hernández-Díaz
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-07-17       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  From causal diagrams to birth weight-specific curves of infant mortality.

Authors:  Sonia Hernández-Díaz; Allen J Wilcox; Enrique F Schisterman; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-01-26       Impact factor: 8.082

7.  Causal inference from indirect experiments.

Authors:  J Pearl
Journal:  Artif Intell Med       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 5.326

Review 8.  Determinants of low birth weight: methodological assessment and meta-analysis.

Authors:  M S Kramer
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 9.408

9.  Overadjustment bias and unnecessary adjustment in epidemiologic studies.

Authors:  Enrique F Schisterman; Stephen R Cole; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.822

10.  A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation.

Authors:  Jay S Kaufman; Richard F Maclehose; Sol Kaufman
Journal:  Epidemiol Perspect Innov       Date:  2004-10-08
View more
  46 in total

1.  Invited commentary: composite outcomes as an attempt to escape from selection bias and related paradoxes.

Authors:  Miguel A Hernán; Enrique F Schisterman; Sonia Hernández-Díaz
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Maternal Weight Gain During Pregnancy: Comparing Methods to Address Bias Due to Length of Gestation in Epidemiological Studies.

Authors:  Stefanie N Hinkle; Emily M Mitchell; Katherine L Grantz; Aijun Ye; Enrique F Schisterman
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 3.980

4.  Constructing Causal Diagrams for Common Perinatal Outcomes: Benefits, Limitations and Motivating Examples with Maternal Antidepressant Use in Pregnancy.

Authors:  Gretchen Bandoli; Kristin Palmsten; Katrina F Flores; Christina D Chambers
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 3.980

5.  Educational Note: Paradoxical collider effect in the analysis of non-communicable disease epidemiological data: a reproducible illustration and web application.

Authors:  Miguel Angel Luque-Fernandez; Michael Schomaker; Daniel Redondo-Sanchez; Maria Jose Sanchez Perez; Anand Vaidya; Mireille E Schnitzer
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 7.196

6.  Confounding, causality, and confusion: the role of intermediate variables in interpreting observational studies in obstetrics.

Authors:  Cande V Ananth; Enrique F Schisterman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Time-dependent propensity score and collider-stratification bias: an example of beta2-agonist use and the risk of coronary heart disease.

Authors:  M Sanni Ali; Rolf H H Groenwold; Wiebe R Pestman; Svetlana V Belitser; Arno W Hoes; A de Boer; Olaf H Klungel
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 8.082

8.  Evaluation of Selection Bias in an Internet-based Study of Pregnancy Planners.

Authors:  Elizabeth E Hatch; Kristen A Hahn; Lauren A Wise; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Ramya Kumar; Matthew P Fox; Daniel R Brooks; Anders H Riis; Henrik Toft Sorensen; Kenneth J Rothman
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.822

9.  Commentary: Resolutions of the birthweight paradox: competing explanations and analytical insights.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Gender and Ethnic Differences in the Association Between Body Image Dissatisfaction and Binge Eating Disorder among Blacks.

Authors:  Freida Blostein; Shervin Assari; Cleopatra Howard Caldwell
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-06-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.