Literature DB >> 20535760

Methods to apply probabilistic bias analysis to summary estimates of association.

Timothy L Lash1, Morten Schmidt, Annette Østergaard Jensen, Malene Cramer Engebjerg.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Bias analysis methods are developed for application to 2 x 2 tables, which may be crude or stratified data. Methods for application to associations adjusted for multiple covariates, such as associations from regression modeling, are rarely seen. We have developed probabilistic methods to evaluate bias from disease misclassification or an unmeasured confounder that can be applied to adjusted estimates of association.
METHODS: Rather than applying bias correction methods that rearrange data within 2 x 2 tables, we have applied them to bias factors directly. We illustrate the methods by application to two pharmacoepidemiology problems.
RESULTS: In example one, the adjusted odds ratio associating glucocorticoid use with the rate of basal cell carcinoma was 1.15 (95%CI 1.07, 1.25). With bias analysis to account for differential disease misclassification, the median odds ratio was 1.32 and the 95% simulation limits were 1.16 and 1.56. In example two, the adjusted odds ratio associating concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors with recurrent myocardial infarction was 1.21 (95%CI 0.90, 1.61). With bias analysis to account for confounding by smoking, which was unmeasured, the median odds ratio was 1.15 with 95% simulation interval 0.85 to 1.55.
CONCLUSION: Methods to apply probabilistic bias analysis to adjusted estimates of association can be implemented if a bias factor can be calculated directly from the bias model. This strategy requires that the bias is independent of confounding by measured variables, or requires that the dependence be incorporated into the bias model, as illustrated in an extension of the second example.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20535760     DOI: 10.1002/pds.1938

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf        ISSN: 1053-8569            Impact factor:   2.890


  13 in total

Review 1.  Probabilistic bias analysis in pharmacoepidemiology and comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jacob N Hunnicutt; Christine M Ulbricht; Stavroula A Chrysanthopoulou; Kate L Lapane
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2016-09-05       Impact factor: 2.890

2.  Comparison of bias analysis strategies applied to a large data set.

Authors:  Timothy L Lash; Barbara Abrams; Lisa M Bodnar
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Correcting for exposure misclassification using survival analysis with a time-varying exposure.

Authors:  Katherine Ahrens; Timothy L Lash; Carol Louik; Allen A Mitchell; Martha M Werler
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 3.797

4.  Study of Cardiovascular Health Outcomes in the Era of Claims Data: The Cardiovascular Health Study.

Authors:  Bruce M Psaty; Joseph A Delaney; Alice M Arnold; Lesley H Curtis; Annette L Fitzpatrick; Susan R Heckbert; Barbara McKnight; Diane Ives; John S Gottdiener; Lewis H Kuller; W T Longstreth
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Stratified Probabilistic Bias Analysis for Body Mass Index-related Exposure Misclassification in Postmenopausal Women.

Authors:  Hailey R Banack; Andrew Stokes; Matthew P Fox; Kathleen M Hovey; Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano; Erin S LeBlanc; Chloe Bird; Bette J Caan; Candyce H Kroenke; Matthew A Allison; Scott B Going; Linda Snetselaar; Ting-Yuan David Cheng; Rowan T Chlebowski; Marcia L Stefanick; Michael J LaMonte; Jean Wactawski-Wende
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Multiple bias analysis using logistic regression: an example from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study.

Authors:  Candice Y Johnson; Penelope P Howards; Matthew J Strickland; D Kim Waller; W Dana Flanders
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2018-06-02       Impact factor: 3.797

7.  Using nationally representative survey data for external adjustment of unmeasured confounders: An example using the NHANES data.

Authors:  Sonia Hernández-Díaz; Brian T Bateman; Kristin Palmsten; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Krista F Huybrechts
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Would increasing centre volumes improve patient outcomes in peritoneal dialysis? A registry-based cohort and Monte Carlo simulation study.

Authors:  David Evans; Thierry Lobbedez; Christian Verger; Antoine Flahault
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Bias in Self-reported Prepregnancy Weight Across Maternal and Clinical Characteristics.

Authors:  Andrea J Sharma; Joanna E Bulkley; Ashley B Stoneburner; Padmavati Dandamudi; Michael Leo; Williams M Callaghan; Kimberly K Vesco
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2021-04-30

10.  Stress Disorders and the Risk of Nonfatal Suicide Attempts in the Danish Population.

Authors:  Amy E Street; Tammy Jiang; Erzsébet Horváth-Puhó; Anthony J Rosellini; Timothy L Lash; Henrik T Sørensen; Jaimie L Gradus
Journal:  J Trauma Stress       Date:  2021-05-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.