Using instruments for selection to adjust for selection bias in Mendelian randomization

被引:2
|
作者
Gkatzionis, Apostolos [1 ,2 ]
Tchetgen, Eric J. Tchetgen [3 ]
Heron, Jon [1 ,2 ]
Northstone, Kate [2 ]
Tilling, Kate [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, MRC Integrat Epidemiol Unit, Bristol, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Bristol Med Sch, Populat Hlth Sci, Bristol, England
[3] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Dept Stat & Data Sci, Philadelphia, PA USA
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
ALSPAC; Heckman selection model; instrumental variables; Mendelian randomization; missing not at random; selection bias; SAMPLE SELECTION; MODELS; ESTIMATOR; INDEX;
D O I
10.1002/sim.10173
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Selection bias is a common concern in epidemiologic studies. In the literature, selection bias is often viewed as a missing data problem. Popular approaches to adjust for bias due to missing data, such as inverse probability weighting, rely on the assumption that data are missing at random and can yield biased results if this assumption is violated. In observational studies with outcome data missing not at random, Heckman's sample selection model can be used to adjust for bias due to missing data. In this paper, we review Heckman's method and a similar approach proposed by Tchetgen Tchetgen and Wirth (2017). We then discuss how to apply these methods to Mendelian randomization analyses using individual-level data, with missing data for either the exposure or outcome or both. We explore whether genetic variants associated with participation can be used as instruments for selection. We then describe how to obtain missingness-adjusted Wald ratio, two-stage least squares and inverse variance weighted estimates. The two methods are evaluated and compared in simulations, with results suggesting that they can both mitigate selection bias but may yield parameter estimates with large standard errors in some settings. In an illustrative real-data application, we investigate the effects of body mass index on smoking using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children.
引用
收藏
页码:4250 / 4271
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression
    Bowden, Jack
    Smith, George Davey
    Burgess, Stephen
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2015, 44 (02) : 512 - 525
  • [22] Selection of genetic instruments in Mendelian randomisation studies of sleep traits
    Paz, Valentina
    Dashti, Hassan S.
    Burgess, Stephen
    Garfield, Victoria
    SLEEP MEDICINE, 2023, 112 : 342 - 351
  • [23] Survivor bias in Mendelian randomization analysis
    Vansteelandt, Stijn
    Dukes, Oliver
    Martinussen, Torben
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2018, 19 (04) : 426 - 443
  • [24] Genetic instrument selection for Mendelian randomization explorations of drug target effects
    Georgakis, Marios K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2020, 49 (04) : 1412 - 1413
  • [25] Selection bias, allocation concealment and randomization design in clinical trials
    Zhao, Wenle
    CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2013, 36 (01) : 263 - 265
  • [26] The many weak instruments problem and Mendelian randomization
    Davies, Neil M.
    Scholder, Stephanie von Hinke Kessler
    Farbmacher, Helmut
    Burgess, Stephen
    Windmeijer, Frank
    Smith, George Davey
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2015, 34 (03) : 454 - 468
  • [27] Mendelian randomization: Using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology
    Lawlor, Debbie A.
    Harbord, Roger M.
    Sterne, Jonathan A. C.
    Timpson, Nic
    Smith, George Davey
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2008, 27 (08) : 1133 - 1163
  • [28] Constrained instruments and their application to Mendelian randomization with pleiotropy
    Jiang, Lai
    Oualkacha, Karim
    Didelez, Vanessa
    Ciampi, Antonio
    Rosa-Neto, Pedro
    Benedet, Andrea L.
    Mathotaarachchi, Sulantha
    Richards, John Brent
    Greenwood, Celia M. T.
    GENETIC EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 43 (04) : 373 - 401
  • [29] When is selection bias not selection bias?
    Przepiorka, D
    Estey, E
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY, 1996, 52 (04) : 330 - 331
  • [30] MR-SPLIT: A novel method to address selection and weak instrument bias in one-sample Mendelian randomization studies
    Shi, Ruxin
    Wang, Ling
    Burgess, Stephen
    Cui, Yuehua
    PLOS GENETICS, 2024, 20 (09):