Literature DB >> 30830435

Avoiding selection bias in metabolomics studies: a tutorial.

S C Boone1, S le Cessie2,3, K Willems van Dijk4,5,6, R de Mutsert2, D O Mook-Kanamori2,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Metabolomics techniques are increasingly applied in epidemiologic research. Many available assays are still relatively expensive and therefore measurements are often performed in small patient population studies such as case series or case-control designs with strong participant selection criteria. Subsequently, metabolomics data are frequently used to assess secondary associations for which the original study was not explicitly designed. Especially in these secondary analyses, there is a risk that the original selection criteria and the conditioning that takes place due to this selection are not properly accounted for which can lead to selection bias. AIM OF REVIEW: In this tutorial, we start with a brief theoretical introduction on the issue of selection bias. Subsequently, we demonstrate how selection bias can occur in metabolomics studies by means of an investigation into associations of metabolites with total body fat in a nested case-control study that was originally designed to study effects of elevated fasting glucose. KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW: We demonstrate that standard analytical methods, such as stratification or adjustment in regression analyses, are not suited to deal with selection bias and may even induce the bias when analysing metabolite-phenotype relationships in selected groups. Finally, we show that inverse probability weighting, also known as survey weighting, can be used in some situations to make unbiased estimates of the outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Collider bias; Epidemiology; Inverse probability weighting; Metabolomics; Selection bias

Year:  2019        PMID: 30830435     DOI: 10.1007/s11306-018-1463-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Metabolomics        ISSN: 1573-3882            Impact factor:   4.290


  17 in total

1.  Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias.

Authors:  Sander Greenland
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  A structural approach to selection bias.

Authors:  Miguel A Hernán; Sonia Hernández-Díaz; James M Robins
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Limitations of the application of fourfold table analysis to hospital data.

Authors:  J BERKSON
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1946-06       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Berkson's bias, selection bias, and missing data.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.822

5.  Genome-wide association scans for secondary traits using case-control samples.

Authors:  Genevieve M Monsees; Rulla M Tamimi; Peter Kraft
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.135

6.  The Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity (NEO) study: study design and data collection.

Authors:  Renée de Mutsert; Martin den Heijer; Ton Johannes Rabelink; Johannes Willem Adriaan Smit; Johannes Anthonius Romijn; Johan Wouter Jukema; Albert de Roos; Christa Maria Cobbaert; Margreet Kloppenburg; Saskia le Cessie; Saskia Middeldorp; Frits Richard Rosendaal
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 8.082

7.  A Robust Example of Collider Bias in a Genetic Association Study.

Authors:  Felix R Day; Po-Ru Loh; Robert A Scott; Ken K Ong; John R B Perry
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Novel biomarkers for pre-diabetes identified by metabolomics.

Authors:  Rui Wang-Sattler; Zhonghao Yu; Christian Herder; Ana C Messias; Anna Floegel; Ying He; Katharina Heim; Monica Campillos; Christina Holzapfel; Barbara Thorand; Harald Grallert; Tao Xu; Erik Bader; Cornelia Huth; Kirstin Mittelstrass; Angela Döring; Christa Meisinger; Christian Gieger; Cornelia Prehn; Werner Roemisch-Margl; Maren Carstensen; Lu Xie; Hisami Yamanaka-Okumura; Guihong Xing; Uta Ceglarek; Joachim Thiery; Guido Giani; Heiko Lickert; Xu Lin; Yixue Li; Heiner Boeing; Hans-Georg Joost; Martin Hrabé de Angelis; Wolfgang Rathmann; Karsten Suhre; Holger Prokisch; Annette Peters; Thomas Meitinger; Michael Roden; H-Erich Wichmann; Tobias Pischon; Jerzy Adamski; Thomas Illig
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 11.429

9.  Essential hypertension: A filtered serum based metabolomics study.

Authors:  Keerti Ameta; Ashish Gupta; Sudeep Kumar; Rishi Sethi; Deepak Kumar; Abbas Ali Mahdi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Identification of serum metabolites associated with risk of type 2 diabetes using a targeted metabolomic approach.

Authors:  Anna Floegel; Norbert Stefan; Zhonghao Yu; Kristin Mühlenbruch; Dagmar Drogan; Hans-Georg Joost; Andreas Fritsche; Hans-Ulrich Häring; Martin Hrabě de Angelis; Annette Peters; Michael Roden; Cornelia Prehn; Rui Wang-Sattler; Thomas Illig; Matthias B Schulze; Jerzy Adamski; Heiner Boeing; Tobias Pischon
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 9.461

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Differences Between the 2016 and 2022 Editions of the Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) Guidelines: Call to Action of FAIR Data and the Creation of a Global Consortium of Bariatric Care and Research.

Authors:  Bart Torensma; Mohamed Hisham; Abdelazeem A Eldawlatly; Mohamed Hany
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 3.479

2.  Inverse probability weighting is an effective method to address selection bias during the analysis of high dimensional data.

Authors:  Patrick M Carry; Lauren A Vanderlinden; Fran Dong; Teresa Buckner; Elizabeth Litkowski; Timothy Vigers; Jill M Norris; Katerina Kechris
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.344

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.