Literature DB >> 22253142

Hierarchical priors for bias parameters in Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding.

Lawrence C McCandless1, Paul Gustafson, Adrian R Levy, Sylvia Richardson.   

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed new innovation in Bayesian techniques to adjust for unmeasured confounding. A challenge with existing methods is that the user is often required to elicit prior distributions for high-dimensional parameters that model competing bias scenarios. This can render the methods unwieldy. In this paper, we propose a novel methodology to adjust for unmeasured confounding that derives default priors for bias parameters for observational studies with binary covariates. The confounding effects of measured and unmeasured variables are treated as exchangeable within a Bayesian framework. We model the joint distribution of covariates by using a log-linear model with pairwise interaction terms. Hierarchical priors constrain the magnitude and direction of bias parameters. An appealing property of the method is that the conditional distribution of the unmeasured confounder follows a logistic model, giving a simple equivalence with previously proposed methods. We apply the method in a data example from pharmacoepidemiology and explore the impact of different priors for bias parameters on the analysis results.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22253142     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4453

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


  5 in total

1.  Bayesian sensitivity analysis methods to evaluate bias due to misclassification and missing data using informative priors and external validation data.

Authors:  George Luta; Melissa B Ford; Melissa Bondy; Peter G Shields; James D Stamey
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 2.984

2.  Using expert opinion to quantify unmeasured confounding bias parameters.

Authors:  Soodabeh Navadeh; Ali Mirzazadeh; Willi McFarland; Sarah Woolf-King; Mohammad Ali Mansournia
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2016-06-27

3.  Adjustment for reporting bias in network meta-analysis of antidepressant trials.

Authors:  Ludovic Trinquart; Gilles Chatellier; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Adjustment for unmeasured confounding through informative priors for the confounder-outcome relation.

Authors:  Rolf H H Groenwold; Inbal Shofty; Milica Miočević; Maarten van Smeden; Irene Klugkist
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-12-22       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  A proxy outcome approach for causal effect in observational studies: a simulation study.

Authors:  Wenbin Liang; Yuejen Zhao; Andy H Lee
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.