Observational studyBMC geriatrics2017
Does being physically active prevent future disability in older people? Attenuated effects when taking time-dependent confounders into account.
Observational study in BMC geriatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCausal experimental evidence that physical activity prevents disability in older people is sparse. Being physically active has nonetheless been shown to be associated with disability-free survival in observational studies. Observational studies are, however, prone to bias introduced by time-dependent confounding. Time-dependent confounding occurs when an exposure (e.g. being physically active at some time-point) potentially affects the future status of a confounder (such as depression sometime later), and both variables have an effect on latter outcome (i.e. disability). "Conventional" analysis with e.g. Cox-regression is the mainstay when analyzing longitudinal observational studies. Unfortunately, it does not provide unbiased estimates in the presence of time-dependent confounding. Marginal structural models (MSM) - a relatively new class of causal models - have the potential to adequately account for time-dependent confounding. Here we analyze the effect of older people being physically active on disability, in a large long-term observational study. We address time-dependent confounding by using marginal structural models and provide a non-technical practical demonstration of how to implement this type of modeling.
methodsData is from 639 elderly individuals ascertained in the European multi-center Leukoaraiosis and Disability study (LADIS), followed-up yearly over a period of three years. We estimated the effect of self-reported physical activity on the probability to transit to instrumental disability in the presence of a large set of potential confounders. We compare the results of "conventional" modeling approaches to those estimated using marginal structural models, highlighting discrepancies.
resultsA "conventional" Cox-regression-like adjustment for salient baseline confounders signals a significant risk reduction under physical activity for later instrumental disability (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.90). However, given MSM estimation, the effect is attenuated towards null (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.57-1.76).
conclusionsContrary to most reports, we did not find that physical activity in older people prevents future instrumental disability, when taking time-dependent confounding into account. This result may be due to the characteristics our particular study population. It is, however, also conceivable that previous evidence neglected the effect of this type of bias. We suggest that analysts of longitudinal observational studies consider marginal structural models as a further modeling approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.