Literature DB >> 33169416

Complexity and bias in cross-sectional data with binary disease outcome in observational studies.

Mei-Cheng Wang1, Yuchen Yang1.   

Abstract

A cross sectional population is defined as a population of living individuals at the sampling or observational time. Cross-sectionally sampled data with binary disease outcome are commonly analyzed in observational studies for identifying how covariates correlate with disease occurrence. It is generally understood that cross-sectional binary outcome is not as informative as longitudinally collected time-to-event data, but there is insufficient understanding as to whether bias can possibly exist in cross-sectional data and how the bias is related to the population risk of interest. As the progression of a disease typically involves both time and disease status, we consider how the binary disease outcome from the cross-sectional population is connected to birth-illness-death process in the target population. We argue that the distribution of cross-sectional binary outcome is different from the risk distribution from the target population and that bias would typically arise when using cross-sectional data to draw inference for population risk. In general, the cross-sectional risk probability is determined jointly by the population risk probability and the ratio of duration of diseased state to the duration of disease-free state. Through explicit formulas we conclude that bias can almost never be avoided from cross-sectional data. We present age-specific risk probability (ARP) and argue that models based on ARP offers a compromised but still biased approach to understand the population risk. An analysis based on Alzheimer's disease data is presented to illustrate the ARP model and possible critiques for the analysis results.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  birth-illness-death process; current status data; logistic model; sampling bias; stationary disease process

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33169416      PMCID: PMC8532079          DOI: 10.1002/sim.8812

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  6 in total

1.  Analysing bivariate survival data with interval sampling and application to cancer epidemiology.

Authors:  Hong Zhu; Mei-Cheng Wang
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 2.445

2.  Estimation of the probability of an event as a function of several independent variables.

Authors:  S H Walker; D B Duncan
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  1967-06       Impact factor: 2.445

3.  Correction of sampling bias in a cross-sectional study of post-surgical complications.

Authors:  Ronen Fluss; Micha Mandel; Laurence S Freedman; Inbal Salz Weiss; Anat Ekka Zohar; Ziona Haklai; Ethel-Sherry Gordon; Elisheva Simchen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-09-04       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Alternating event processes during lifetimes: population dynamics and statistical inference.

Authors:  Russell T Shinohara; Yifei Sun; Mei-Cheng Wang
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 1.588

5.  Incidence and prevalence as used in the analysis of the occurrence of nosocomial infections.

Authors:  F S Rhame; W D Sudderth
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Acceleration of Alzheimer's fibril formation by apolipoprotein E in vitro.

Authors:  T Wisniewski; E M Castaño; A Golabek; T Vogel; B Frangione
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 4.307

  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  An empirical analysis of the impact of income inequality and social capital on physical and mental health - take China's micro-database analysis as an example.

Authors:  Yuanyuan He; Lulin Zhou; Junshan Li; Jun Wu
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2021-11-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.