Literature DB >> 25867114

The relation of collapsibility and confounding to faithfulness and stability.

Mohammad Ali Mansournia1, Sander Greenland.   

Abstract

A probability distribution may have some properties that are stable under a structure (e.g., a causal graph) and other properties that are unstable. Stable properties are implied by the structure and thus will be shared by populations following the structure. In contrast, unstable properties correspond to special circumstances that are unlikely to be replicated across those populations. A probability distribution is faithful to the structure if all independencies in the distribution are logical consequences of the structure. We explore the distinction between confounding and noncollapsibility in relation to the concepts of faithfulness and stability. Simple collapsibility of an odds ratio over a risk factor is unstable and thus unlikely if the exposure affects the outcome, whether or not the risk factor is associated with exposure. For a binary exposure with no effect, collapsibility over a confounder also requires unfaithfulness. Nonetheless, if present, simple collapsibility of the odds ratio limits the degree of confounding by the covariate. Collapsibility of effect measures is stable if the covariate is independent of the outcome given exposure, but it is unstable if the covariate is an instrumental variable. Understanding stable and unstable properties of distributions under causal structures, and the distinction between stability and faithfulness, yields important insights into the correspondence between noncollapsibility and confounding.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25867114     DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000291

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


  12 in total

1.  Limitations of individual causal models, causal graphs, and ignorability assumptions, as illustrated by random confounding and design unfaithfulness.

Authors:  Sander Greenland; Mohammad Ali Mansournia
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  The Implications of Using Lagged and Baseline Exposure Terms in Longitudinal Causal and Regression Models.

Authors:  Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Ashley I Naimi; Sander Greenland
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  How subgroup analyses can miss the trees for the forest plots: A simulation study.

Authors:  Michael Webster-Clark; John A Baron; Michele Jonsson Funk; Daniel Westreich
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Accounting for Time-Varying Confounding in the Relationship Between Obesity and Coronary Heart Disease: Analysis With G-Estimation: The ARIC Study.

Authors:  Maryam Shakiba; Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Arsalan Salari; Hamid Soori; Nasrin Mansournia; Jay S Kaufman
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Case-control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations.

Authors:  Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Nicholas Patrick Jewell; Sander Greenland
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 12.434

6.  A CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers (the CHAMP statement): explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Gary S Collins; Rasmus Oestergaard Nielsen; Maryam Nazemipour; Nicholas P Jewell; Douglas G Altman; Michael J Campbell
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 18.473

7.  Sensitivity analysis for mistakenly adjusting for mediators in estimating total effect in observational studies.

Authors:  Tingting Wang; Hongkai Li; Ping Su; Yuanyuan Yu; Xiaoru Sun; Yi Liu; Zhongshang Yuan; Fuzhong Xue
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  On hazard ratio estimators by proportional hazards models in matched-pair cohort studies.

Authors:  Tomohiro Shinozaki; Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Yutaka Matsuyama
Journal:  Emerg Themes Epidemiol       Date:  2017-06-05

9.  Noncollapsibility and its role in quantifying confounding bias in logistic regression.

Authors:  Noah A Schuster; Jos W R Twisk; Gerben Ter Riet; Martijn W Heymans; Judith J M Rijnhart
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Estimating Counterfactual Risk Under Hypothetical Interventions in the Presence of Competing Events: Crystalline Silica Exposure and Mortality From 2 Causes of Death.

Authors:  Andreas M Neophytou; Sally Picciotto; Daniel M Brown; Lisa E Gallagher; Harvey Checkoway; Ellen A Eisen; Sadie Costello
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 4.897

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.