Literature DB >> 29936049

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

Candice Y Johnson1, Penelope P Howards2, Matthew J Strickland3, D Kim Waller4, W Dana Flanders2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Exposure misclassification, selection bias, and confounding are important biases in epidemiologic studies, yet only confounding is routinely addressed quantitatively. We describe how to combine two previously described methods and adjust for multiple biases using logistic regression.
METHODS: Weights were created from selection probabilities and predictive values for exposure classification and applied to multivariable logistic regression models in a case-control study of prepregnancy obesity (body mass index ≥30 vs. <30 kg/m2) and cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P) using data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (2523 cases, 10,605 controls).
RESULTS: Adjusting for confounding by race/ethnicity, prepregnancy obesity, and CL/P were weakly associated (odds ratio [OR]: 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.98, 1.23). After weighting the data to account for exposure misclassification, missing exposure data, selection bias, and confounding, multiple bias-adjusted ORs ranged from 0.94 to 1.03 in nonprobabilistic bias analyses and median multiple bias-adjusted ORs ranged from 0.93 to 1.02 in probabilistic analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: This approach, adjusting for multiple biases using a logistic regression model, suggested that the observed association between obesity and CL/P could be due to the presence of bias. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bias; Body mass index; Cleft lip; Regression analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29936049      PMCID: PMC6060411          DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.05.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Epidemiol        ISSN: 1047-2797            Impact factor:   3.797


  21 in total

1.  Causation of bias: the episcope.

Authors:  M Maclure; S Schneeweiss
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  Semi-automated sensitivity analysis to assess systematic errors in observational data.

Authors:  Timothy L Lash; Aliza K Fink
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Does low participation in cohort studies induce bias?

Authors:  Ellen Aagaard Nohr; Morten Frydenberg; Tine Brink Henriksen; Jorn Olsen
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  A method to automate probabilistic sensitivity analyses of misclassified binary variables.

Authors:  Matthew P Fox; Timothy L Lash; Sander Greenland
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 7.196

5.  Differential misclassification arising from nondifferential errors in exposure measurement.

Authors:  K M Flegal; P M Keyl; F J Nieto
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1991-11-15       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Adjusting a relative-risk estimate for study imperfections.

Authors:  G Maldonado
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.710

7.  Potential sensitivity of bias analysis results to incorrect assumptions of nondifferential or differential binary exposure misclassification.

Authors:  Candice Y Johnson; W Dana Flanders; Matthew J Strickland; Margaret A Honein; Penelope P Howards
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.822

8.  Is probabilistic bias analysis approximately Bayesian?

Authors:  Richard F MacLehose; Paul Gustafson
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.822

9.  Sensitivity analysis for misclassification in logistic regression via likelihood methods and predictive value weighting.

Authors:  Robert H Lyles; Ji Lin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Sensitivity Analysis Without Assumptions.

Authors:  Peng Ding; Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.822

View more
  2 in total

1.  Prepregnancy body mass index and spina bifida: Potential contributions of bias.

Authors:  Candice Y Johnson; Margaret A Honein; Sonja A Rasmussen; Penelope P Howards; Matthew J Strickland; W Dana Flanders
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 2.661

2.  Gestational Weight Gain and Long-term Maternal Obesity Risk: A Multiple-Bias Analysis.

Authors:  Franya Hutchins; Robert Krafty; Samar R El Khoudary; Janet Catov; Alicia Colvin; Emma Barinas-Mitchell; Maria M Brooks
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 4.860

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.