Elizabeth Rose Mayeda1,2, Teresa J Filshtein2,3, Yorghos Tripodis4, M Maria Glymour2, Alden L Gross5. 1. Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Los Angeles Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 3. Department of Statistics, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
Background: The relationship between education and late-life cognitive decline is controversial. Selective survival between early life, when education is typically completed, and late life, when cognitive ageing studies take place, could attenuate effect estimates. Methods: We quantified potential survival bias (collider-stratification bias) in estimation of the effect of education on late-life cognitive decline by simulating hypothetical cohorts of 20-year-olds and applying cumulative mortality from US life tables. For each of four causal scenarios (2000 replications each), we compared the estimated versus causal effect of education on cognitive decline over 9 years, starting at age 60, 75 or 90 in random samples of n = 2000 people who survived to each age. Results: Effects of education on cognitive decline were underestimated when both education and U, another determinant of cognitive decline, influenced mortality (collider-stratification bias). The magnitude of bias was sensitive to the magnitude of the effect of U on cognitive decline and whether there was a multiplicative interaction between education and U on mortality. For example, when there was a multiplicative interaction between education and U on mortality, 95% confidence interval coverage of the causal effect ranged from 83.4% to 50.4% at age 60 and 25.8% to 0.2% at age 90. Conclusions: Selective survival could lead to underestimation of effects of education on late-life cognitive decline. Our simulations map survival bias to testable assumptions about underlying causal structures.
Background: The relationship between education and late-life cognitive decline is controversial. Selective survival between early life, when education is typically completed, and late life, when cognitive ageing studies take place, could attenuate effect estimates. Methods: We quantified potential survival bias (collider-stratification bias) in estimation of the effect of education on late-life cognitive decline by simulating hypothetical cohorts of 20-year-olds and applying cumulative mortality from US life tables. For each of four causal scenarios (2000 replications each), we compared the estimated versus causal effect of education on cognitive decline over 9 years, starting at age 60, 75 or 90 in random samples of n = 2000 people who survived to each age. Results: Effects of education on cognitive decline were underestimated when both education and U, another determinant of cognitive decline, influenced mortality (collider-stratification bias). The magnitude of bias was sensitive to the magnitude of the effect of U on cognitive decline and whether there was a multiplicative interaction between education and U on mortality. For example, when there was a multiplicative interaction between education and U on mortality, 95% confidence interval coverage of the causal effect ranged from 83.4% to 50.4% at age 60 and 25.8% to 0.2% at age 90. Conclusions: Selective survival could lead to underestimation of effects of education on late-life cognitive decline. Our simulations map survival bias to testable assumptions about underlying causal structures.
Authors: Jessica R Marden; Elizabeth R Mayeda; Stefan Walter; Alexandre Vivot; Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen; Ichiro Kawachi; M Maria Glymour Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2016 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Andrea L C Schneider; A Richey Sharrett; Mehul D Patel; Alvaro Alonso; Josef Coresh; Thomas Mosley; Ola Selnes; Elizabeth Selvin; Rebecca F Gottesman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-09-26 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Victor L Villemagne; Samantha Burnham; Pierrick Bourgeat; Belinda Brown; Kathryn A Ellis; Olivier Salvado; Cassandra Szoeke; S Lance Macaulay; Ralph Martins; Paul Maruff; David Ames; Christopher C Rowe; Colin L Masters Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-03-08 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Rebecca F Gottesman; Andreea M Rawlings; A Richey Sharrett; Marilyn Albert; Alvaro Alonso; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Laura H Coker; Josef Coresh; David J Couper; Michael E Griswold; Gerardo Heiss; David S Knopman; Mehul D Patel; Alan D Penman; Melinda C Power; Ola A Selnes; Andrea L C Schneider; Lynne E Wagenknecht; B Gwen Windham; Lisa M Wruck; Thomas H Mosley Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2014-03-13 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; Meagan T Farrell; Collin F Payne; Sumaya Mall; Livia Montana; Ryan G Wagner; Kathleen Kahn; Stephen Tollman; Lisa F Berkman Journal: Psychol Aging Date: 2020-07-23
Authors: Crystal Shaw; Eleanor Hayes-Larson; M Maria Glymour; Carole Dufouil; Timothy J Hohman; Rachel A Whitmer; Lindsay C Kobayashi; Ron Brookmeyer; Elizabeth Rose Mayeda Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-03-01
Authors: Martin Lövdén; Laura Fratiglioni; M Maria Glymour; Ulman Lindenberger; Elliot M Tucker-Drob Journal: Psychol Sci Public Interest Date: 2020-08
Authors: Mark É Czeisler; Joshua F Wiley; Charles A Czeisler; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Mark E Howard Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 6.892