The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates

Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates
Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates
Background: Common methods for confounder identification such as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), hypothesis testing, or a 10 % change-in-estimate (CIE) criterion for estimated associations may not be applicable due to (a) insufficient knowledge to draw a DAG and (b) when adjustment for a true confounder produces less than 10 % change in observed estimate (e.g. in presence of measurement error). Methods: We compare previously proposed simulation-based approach for confounder identification that can be tailored to each specific study and contrast it with commonly applied methods (significance criteria with cutoff levels of p-values of 0.05 or 0.20, and CIE criterion with a cutoff of 10 %), as well as newly proposed two-stage procedure aimed at reduction of false positives (specifically, risk factors that are not confounders). The new procedure first evaluates potential for confounding by examination of correlation of covariates and applies simulated CIE criteria only if there is evidence of correlation, while rejecting a covariate as confounder otherwise. These approaches are compared in simulations studies with binary, continuous, and survival outcomes. We illustrate the application of our proposed confounder identification strategy in examining the association of exposure to mercury in relation to depression in the presence of suspected confounding by fish intake using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009-2010 data. Results: Our simulations showed that the simulation-determined cutoff was very sensitive to measurement error in exposure and potential confounder. The analysis of NHANES data demonstrated that if the noise-to-signal ratio (error variance in confounder/variance of confounder) is at or below 0.5, roughly 80 % of the simulated analyses adjusting for fish consumption would correctly result in a null association of mercury and depression, and only an extremely poorly measured confounder is not useful to adjust for in this setting. Conclusions: No a prior criterion developed for a specific application is guaranteed to be suitable for confounder identification in general. The customization of model-building strategies and study designs through simulations that consider the likely imperfections in the data, as well as finite-sample behavior, would constitute an important improvement on some of the currently prevailing practices in confounder identification and evaluation.
Causal effect, Change-in-estimate, Confounding, Epidemiology, Model-selection, Simulation
1471-2288
Lee, Paul H.
02620eab-ae7f-4a1c-bad1-8a50e7e48951
Burstyn, Igor
7d962e4e-cd51-4c44-905b-a9311d55c5b2
Lee, Paul H.
02620eab-ae7f-4a1c-bad1-8a50e7e48951
Burstyn, Igor
7d962e4e-cd51-4c44-905b-a9311d55c5b2

Lee, Paul H. and Burstyn, Igor (2016) Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16 (1), [54]. (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0159-6).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: Common methods for confounder identification such as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), hypothesis testing, or a 10 % change-in-estimate (CIE) criterion for estimated associations may not be applicable due to (a) insufficient knowledge to draw a DAG and (b) when adjustment for a true confounder produces less than 10 % change in observed estimate (e.g. in presence of measurement error). Methods: We compare previously proposed simulation-based approach for confounder identification that can be tailored to each specific study and contrast it with commonly applied methods (significance criteria with cutoff levels of p-values of 0.05 or 0.20, and CIE criterion with a cutoff of 10 %), as well as newly proposed two-stage procedure aimed at reduction of false positives (specifically, risk factors that are not confounders). The new procedure first evaluates potential for confounding by examination of correlation of covariates and applies simulated CIE criteria only if there is evidence of correlation, while rejecting a covariate as confounder otherwise. These approaches are compared in simulations studies with binary, continuous, and survival outcomes. We illustrate the application of our proposed confounder identification strategy in examining the association of exposure to mercury in relation to depression in the presence of suspected confounding by fish intake using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009-2010 data. Results: Our simulations showed that the simulation-determined cutoff was very sensitive to measurement error in exposure and potential confounder. The analysis of NHANES data demonstrated that if the noise-to-signal ratio (error variance in confounder/variance of confounder) is at or below 0.5, roughly 80 % of the simulated analyses adjusting for fish consumption would correctly result in a null association of mercury and depression, and only an extremely poorly measured confounder is not useful to adjust for in this setting. Conclusions: No a prior criterion developed for a specific application is guaranteed to be suitable for confounder identification in general. The customization of model-building strategies and study designs through simulations that consider the likely imperfections in the data, as well as finite-sample behavior, would constitute an important improvement on some of the currently prevailing practices in confounder identification and evaluation.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 10 May 2016
Published date: 18 May 2016
Additional Information: Publisher Copyright: © 2016 Lee and Burstyn.
Keywords: Causal effect, Change-in-estimate, Confounding, Epidemiology, Model-selection, Simulation

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 475161
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/475161
ISSN: 1471-2288
PURE UUID: 690e0e8e-8519-4579-b453-54a6d4c0b8fe
ORCID for Paul H. Lee: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5729-6450

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Mar 2023 17:47
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:16

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Paul H. Lee ORCID iD
Author: Igor Burstyn

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×