Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31559947›Full record

ArticleTwin research and human genetics : the official journal of the International Society for Twin Studies2019

Sibling Comparison Designs: Addressing Confounding Bias with Inclusion of Measured Confounders.

Gretchen R B Saunders, Matt McGue, Stephen M Malone

Abstract readComparative StudyTwin Study
In one paragraph

Article in Twin research and human genetics : the official journal of the International Society for Twin Studies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Maternal early pregnancy body mass index and risk of sleep apnea in the offspring.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Gretchen R B SaundersDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Matt McGueDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Stephen M MaloneDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

Adolescent drinking and midlife outcomes: A prospective cotwin control studyR37AA009367 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI MCGUE, MATTHEW K. · 2016 to 2024
$5.4M
Adult consequences of youth substance use: Twin study enriched for SUD riskR01DA036216 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI IACONO, WILLIAM G. · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
NIAAA NIH HHS R37 AA009367NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA036216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetically informative research designs are becoming increasingly popular as a way to strengthen causal inference with their ability to control for genetic and shared environmental confounding. Co-twin control (CTC) models, a special case of these designs using twin samples, decompose the overall effect of exposure on outcome into a within- and between-twin-pair term. Ideally, the within-twin-pair term would serve as an estimate of the exposure effect controlling for genetic and shared environmental factors, but it is often confounded by factors not shared within a twin-pair. Previous simulation work has shown that if twins are less similar on an unmeasured confounder than they are on an exposure, the within-twin-pair estimate will be a biased estimate of the exposure effect, even more biased than the individual, unpaired estimate. The current study uses simulation and analytical derivations to show that while incorporating a covariate related to the nonshared confounder in CTC models always reduces bias in the within-pair estimate, it will be less biased than the individual estimate only in a narrow set of circumstances. The best case for bias reduction in the within-pair estimate occurs when the within-twin-pair correlation in exposure is less than the correlation in the confounder and the twin-pair correlation in the covariate is high. Additionally, the form of covariate inclusion is compared between adjustment for only one's own covariate value and adjustment for the deviation of one's own value from the covariate twin-pair mean. Results show that adjusting for the deviation from the twin-pair mean results in equal or reduced bias.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticSiblingsBiasFemaleHumansTwinsbetween-withinbiasconfoundingCo-twin controlcovariate adjustmentdiscordant twin

Identifiers

PMID31559947
PMCPMC7170177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.