| Literature DB >> 30561628 |
Miguel Angel Luque-Fernandez1,2,3,4,5, Michael Schomaker6, Daniel Redondo-Sanchez1,5, Maria Jose Sanchez Perez1,5, Anand Vaidya7, Mireille E Schnitzer8,9.
Abstract
Classical epidemiology has focused on the control of confounding, but it is only recently that epidemiologists have started to focus on the bias produced by colliders. A collider for a certain pair of variables (e.g. an outcome Y and an exposure A) is a third variable (C) that is caused by both. In a directed acyclic graph (DAG), a collider is the variable in the middle of an inverted fork (i.e. the variable C in A → C ← Y). Controlling for, or conditioning an analysis on a collider (i.e. through stratification or regression) can introduce a spurious association between its causes. This potentially explains many paradoxical findings in the medical literature, where established risk factors for a particular outcome appear protective. We use an example from non-communicable disease epidemiology to contextualize and explain the effect of conditioning on a collider. We generate a dataset with 1000 observations, and run Monte-Carlo simulations to estimate the effect of 24-h dietary sodium intake on systolic blood pressure, controlling for age, which acts as a confounder, and 24-h urinary protein excretion, which acts as a collider. We illustrate how adding a collider to a regression model introduces bias. Thus, to prevent paradoxical associations, epidemiologists estimating causal effects should be wary of conditioning on colliders. We provide R code in easy-to-read boxes throughout the manuscript, and a GitHub repository [https://github.com/migariane/ColliderApp] for the reader to reproduce our example. We also provide an educational web application allowing real-time interaction to visualize the paradoxical effect of conditioning on a collider [http://watzilei.com/shiny/collider/].Entities:
Keywords: Epidemiological methods; causality; non-communicable disease epidemiology
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30561628 PMCID: PMC6469301 DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyy275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Epidemiol ISSN: 0300-5771 Impact factor: 7.196