Document Detail


Instrumental variables vs. grouping approach for reducing bias due to measurement error.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22462115     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Process    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
Attenuation of the exposure-response relationship due to exposure measurement error is often encountered in epidemiology. Given that error cannot be totally eliminated, bias correction methods of analysis are needed. Many methods require more than one exposure measurement per person to be made, but the `group mean OLS method,' in which subjects are grouped into several a priori defined groups followed by ordinary least squares (OLS) regression on the group means, can be applied with one measurement. An alternative approach is to use an instrumental variable (IV) method in which both the single error-prone measure and an IV are used in IV analysis. In this paper we show that the `group mean OLS' estimator is equal to an IV estimator with the group mean used as IV, but that the variance estimators for the two methods are different. We derive a simple expression for the bias in the common estimator which is a simple function of group size, reliability and contrast of exposure between groups, and show that the bias can be very small when group size is large. We compare this method with a new proposal (group mean ranking method), also applicable with a single exposure measurement, in which the IV is the rank of the group means. When there are two independent exposure measurements per subject, we propose a new IV method (EVROS IV) and compare it with Carroll and Stefanski's (CS IV) proposal in which the second measure is used as an IV; the new IV estimator combines aspects of the `group mean' and `CS' strategies. All methods are evaluated in terms of bias, precision and root mean square error via simulations and a dataset from occupational epidemiology. The `group mean ranking method' does not offer much improvement over the `group mean method.' Compared with the `CS' method, the `EVROS' method is less affected by low reliability of exposure. We conclude that the group IV methods we propose may provide a useful way to handle mismeasured exposures in epidemiology with or without replicate measurements. Our finding may also have implications for the use of aggregate variables in epidemiology to control for unmeasured confounding.
Authors:
Evridiki Batistatou; Roseanne McNamee
Related Documents :
23684425 - Vascular remodeling and intimal hyperplasia in a novel murine model of arteriovenous fi...
22736685 - The secrets to the success of the rush--larsen method and its generalizations.
23893455 - Engineering animal models of dystonia.
22640755 - Genomic breeding value prediction and qtl mapping of qtlmas2011 data using bayesian and...
22830835 - Poster - thur eve - 19: risk assessment of clinical radiation processes using failure m...
24410995 - A decision support system to determine optimal ventilator settings.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  The international journal of biostatistics     Volume:  4     ISSN:  1557-4679     ISO Abbreviation:  Int J Biostat     Publication Date:  2008  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-03-30     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101313850     Medline TA:  Int J Biostat     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  Article 8     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
University of Manchester
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  On the Plackett distribution with bivariate censored data.
Next Document:  Sample size estimation for repeated measures analysis in randomized clinical trials with missing dat...