Literature DB >> 21495062

Two-stage instrumental variable methods for estimating the causal odds ratio: analysis of bias.

Bing Cai1, Dylan S Small, Thomas R Ten Have.   

Abstract

We present closed-form expressions of asymptotic bias for the causal odds ratio from two estimation approaches of instrumental variable logistic regression: (i) the two-stage predictor substitution (2SPS) method and (ii) the two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI) approach. Under the 2SPS approach, the first stage model yields the predicted value of treatment as a function of an instrument and covariates, and in the second stage model for the outcome, this predicted value replaces the observed value of treatment as a covariate. Under the 2SRI approach, the first stage is the same, but the residual term of the first stage regression is included in the second stage regression, retaining the observed treatment as a covariate. Our bias assessment is for a different context from that of Terza (J. Health Econ. 2008; 27(3):531-543), who focused on the causal odds ratio conditional on the unmeasured confounder, whereas we focus on the causal odds ratio among compliers under the principal stratification framework. Our closed-form bias results show that the 2SPS logistic regression generates asymptotically biased estimates of this causal odds ratio when there is no unmeasured confounding and that this bias increases with increasing unmeasured confounding. The 2SRI logistic regression is asymptotically unbiased when there is no unmeasured confounding, but when there is unmeasured confounding, there is bias and it increases with increasing unmeasured confounding. The closed-form bias results provide guidance for using these IV logistic regression methods. Our simulation results are consistent with our closed-form analytic results under different combinations of parameter settings.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21495062     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4241

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  24 in total

1.  Instrumental variable analysis in the presence of unmeasured confounding.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Md Jamal Uddin; Jing Cheng; Tao Huang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-05

2.  Assessment of Heart Transplant Waitlist Time and Pre- and Post-transplant Failure: A Mixed Methods Approach.

Authors:  Benjamin A Goldstein; Laine Thomas; Jonathan G Zaroff; John Nguyen; Rebecca Menza; Kiran K Khush
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Understanding Causal Distributional and Subgroup Effects With the Instrumental Propensity Score.

Authors:  Jing Cheng; Winston Lin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Weighted estimators of the complier average causal effect on restricted mean survival time with observed instrument-outcome confounders.

Authors:  Sai H Dharmarajan; Yun Li; Douglas Lehmann; Douglas E Schaubel
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 2.207

5.  Near/far matching: a study design approach to instrumental variables.

Authors:  Mike Baiocchi; Dylan S Small; Lin Yang; Daniel Polsky; Peter W Groeneveld
Journal:  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol       Date:  2012-06-09

6.  Instrumental variables estimation of exposure effects on a time-to-event endpoint using structural cumulative survival models.

Authors:  Torben Martinussen; Stijn Vansteelandt; Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen; David M Zucker
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 7.  A systematic review of instrumental variable analyses using geographic region as an instrument.

Authors:  Emily A Vertosick; Melissa Assel; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Bias in estimating the causal hazard ratio when using two-stage instrumental variable methods.

Authors:  Fei Wan; Dylan Small; Justin E Bekelman; Nandita Mitra
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Instrumental variable approach for estimating a causal hazard ratio: application to the effect of postmastectomy radiotherapy on breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Fan Yang; Jing Cheng; Dezheng Huo
Journal:  Obs Stud       Date:  2019-10-18

10.  Instrumental variable methods for causal inference.

Authors:  Michael Baiocchi; Jing Cheng; Dylan S Small
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.