Search

Measurement error is pervasive in epidemiologic research. Epidemiologists often assume that mismeasurement of study variables is nondifferential with respect to other analytical variables and then rely on the heuristic that "nondifferential misclassification will bias estimates towards the null." However, there are many exceptions to the heuristic for which bias towards the null cannot be assumed. In this paper, we compile and characterize 7 exceptions to this rule and encourage analysts to take a more critical and nuanced approach to evaluating and discussing bias from nondifferential mismeasurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Principled methods with which to appropriately analyze missing data have long existed; however, broad implementation of these methods remains challenging. In this and 2 companion papers (Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(3):576-584 and Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(3):585-591), we discuss issues pertaining to missing data in the epidemiologic literature. We provide details regarding missing-data mechanisms and nomenclature and encourage the conduct of principled analyses through a detailed comparison of multiple imputation and inverse probability weighting. Data from the Collaborative Perinatal Project, a multisite US study conducted from 1959 to 1974, are used to create a masked data-analytical challenge with missing data induced by known mechanisms. We illustrate the deleterious effects of missing data with naive methods and show how principled methods can sometimes mitigate such effects. For example, when data were missing at random, naive methods showed a spurious protective effect of smoking on the risk of spontaneous abortion (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19, 0.93),while implementation of principled methods multiple imputation (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.77) or augmented inverse probability weighting (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.97) provided estimates closer to the "true" full-data effect (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.64). We call for greater acknowledgement of and attention to missing data and for the broad use of principled missing-data methods in epidemiologic research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cohort studies are often enriched for a primary exposure of interest to improve cost-effectiveness, which presents analytical challenges not commonly discussed in epidemiology. In this paper, we use causal diagrams to represent exposure-enriched cohort studies, illustrate a scenario wherein the risk ratio for the effect of a secondary exposure on an outcome is biased, and propose an analytical method for correcting for such bias. In our motivating example, maternal smoking (Z) is a cause of fetal growth restriction (X), which subsequently affects preterm birth (Y) (i.e., Z → X → Y); strong positive associations exist between both Z, X and X, Y; and enrichment for X increases its prevalence from 10% to 50%. In the X-enriched cohort, unadjusted and X-adjusted analyses lead to bias in the risk ratio for the total effect of Z on Y. After application of inverse probability weights, the bias is corrected, with a small loss of efficiency in comparison with a same-sized study without X-enrichment. With increasing interest in conducting secondary analyses to reduce research costs, caution should be employed when analyzing studies that have already been enriched, intentionally or unintentionally, for a primary exposure of interest. Causal diagrams can help identify scenarios in which secondary analyses may be biased. Inverse probability weights can be used to remove the bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regression calibration is a popular approach for correcting biases in estimated regression parameters when exposure variables are measured with error. This approach involves building a calibration equation to estimate the value of the unknown true exposure given the error-prone measurement and other covariates. The estimated, or calibrated, exposure is then substituted for the unknown true exposure in the health outcome regression model. When used properly, regression calibration can greatly reduce the bias induced by exposure measurement error. Here, we first provide an overview of the statistical framework for regression calibration, specifically discussing how a special type of error, called Berkson error, arises in the estimated exposure. We then present practical issues to consider when applying regression calibration, including: 1) how to develop the calibration equation and which covariates to include; 2) valid ways to calculate standard errors of estimated regression coefficients; and 3) problems arising if one of the covariates in the calibration model is a mediator of the relationship between the exposure and outcome. Throughout, we provide illustrative examples using data from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (United States, 2008–2011) and simulations. We conclude with recommendations for how to perform regression calibration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many epidemiologic studies use metabolomics for discovery-based research. The degree to which sample handling may influence findings, however, is poorly understood. In 2016, serum samples from 13 volunteers from the US Department of Agriculture's Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center were subjected to different clotting (30 minutes/120 minutes) and refrigeration (0 minutes/24 hours) conditions, as well as different numbers (0/1/4) and temperatures (ice/refrigerator/room temperature) of thaws. The median absolute percent difference (APD) between metabolite levels and correlations between levels across conditions were estimated for 628 metabolites. The potential for handling artifacts to induce false-positive associations was estimated using variable hypothetical scenarios in which 1%–100% of case samples had different handling than control samples. All handling conditions influenced metabolite levels. Across metabolites, the median APD when extending clotting time was 9.08%. When increasing the number of thaws from 0 to 4, the median APD was 10.05% for ice and 5.54% for room temperature. Metabolite levels were correlated highly across conditions (all r 's ≥ 0.84), indicating that relative ranks were preserved. However, if handling varied even modestly by case status, our hypotheticals showed that results can be biased and can result in false-positive findings. Sample handling affects levels of metabolites, and special care should be taken to minimize effects. Shorter room-temperature thaws should be preferred over longer ice thaws, and handling should be meticulously matched by case status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mendelian randomization (MR) is used to answer a variety of epidemiologic questions. One stated advantage of MR is that it estimates a "lifetime effect" of exposure, though this term remains vaguely defined. Instrumental variable analysis, on which MR is based, has focused on estimating the effects of point or time-fixed exposures rather than "lifetime effects." Here we use an empirical example with data from the Rotterdam Study (Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 2009–2013) to demonstrate how confusion can arise when estimating "lifetime effects." We provide one possible definition of a lifetime effect: the average change in outcome measured at time t when the entire exposure trajectory from conception to time t is shifted by 1 unit. We show that MR only estimates this type of lifetime effect under specific conditions—for example, when the effect of the genetic variants used on exposure does not change over time. Lastly, we simulate the magnitude of bias that would result in realistic scenarios that use genetic variants with effects that change over time. We recommend that investigators in future MR studies carefully consider the effect of interest and how genetic variants whose effects change with time may impact the interpretability and validity of their results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Loss to follow-up is an endemic feature of time-to-event analyses that precludes observation of the event of interest. To our knowledge, in typical cohort studies with encounters occurring at regular or irregular intervals, there is no consensus on how to handle person-time between participants' last study encounter and the point at which they meet a definition of loss to follow-up. We demonstrate, using simulation and an example, that when the event of interest is captured outside of a study encounter (e.g., in a registry), person-time should be censored when the study-defined criterion for loss to follow-up is met (e.g., 1 year after last encounter), rather than at the last study encounter. Conversely, when the event of interest must be measured within the context of a study encounter (e.g., a biomarker value), person-time should be censored at the last study encounter. An inappropriate censoring scheme has the potential to result in substantial bias that may not be easily corrected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The clustering of human papillomavirus (HPV) infections in some individuals is often interpreted as the result of common risk factors rather than biological interactions between different types of HPV. The intraindividual correlation between times-at-risk for all HPV infections is not generally considered in the analysis of epidemiologic studies. We used a deterministic transmission model to simulate cross-sectional and prospective epidemiologic studies measuring associations between 2 HPV types. When we assumed no interactions, the model predicted that studies would estimate odds ratios and incidence rate ratios greater than 1 between HPV types even after complete adjustment for sexual behavior. We demonstrated that this residual association is due to correlation between the times-at-risk for different HPV types, where individuals become concurrently at risk for all of their partners' HPV types when they enter a partnership and are not at risk when they are single. This correlation can be controlled in prospective studies by restricting analyses to susceptible individuals with an infected sexual partner. The bias in the measured associations was largest in low-sexual-activity populations, cross-sectional studies, and studies which evaluated infection with a first HPV type as the exposure. These results suggest that current epidemiologic evidence does not preclude the existence of competitive biological interactions between HPV types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electronic health records (EHRs) are an increasingly utilized resource for clinical research. While their size allows for many analytical opportunities, as with most observational data there is also the potential for bias. One of the key sources of bias in EHRs is what we term informed presence--the notion that inclusion in an EHR is not random but rather indicates that the subject is ill, making people in EHRs systematically different from those not in EHRs. In this article, we use simulated and empirical data to illustrate the conditions under which such bias can arise and how conditioning on the number of health-care encounters can be one way to remove this bias. In doing so, we also show when such an approach can impart M bias, or bias from conditioning on a collider. Finally, we explore the conditions under which number of medical encounters can serve as a proxy for general health. We apply these methods to an EHR data set from a university medical center covering the years 2007-2013. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In time-to-event analyses of observational studies of drug effectiveness, incorrect handling of the period between cohort entry and first treatment exposure during follow-up may result in immortal time bias. This bias can be eliminated by acknowledging a change in treatment exposure status with time-dependent analyses, such as fitting a time-dependent Cox model. The prescription time-distribution matching (PTDM) method has been proposed as a simpler approach for controlling immortal time bias. Using simulation studies and theoretical quantification of bias, we compared the performance of the PTDM approach with that of the time-dependent Cox model in the presence of immortal time. Both assessments revealed that the PTDM approach did not adequately address immortal time bias. Based on our simulation results, another recently proposed observational data analysis technique, the sequential Cox approach, was found to be more useful than the PTDM approach (Cox: bias = -0.002, mean squared error = 0.025; PTDM: bias = -1.411, mean squared error = 2.011). We applied these approaches to investigate the association of β-interferon treatment with delaying disability progression in a multiple sclerosis cohort in British Columbia, Canada (Long-Term Benefits and Adverse Effects of Beta-Interferon for Multiple Sclerosis (BeAMS) Study, 1995-2008). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]