Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39039030›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2024

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

Apostolos Gkatzionis, Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen, Jon Heron, Kate Northstone, Kate Tilling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors.

Apostolos GkatzionisMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4942-0025
Eric J Tchetgen TchetgenDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Jon HeronMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Kate NorthstonePopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Kate TillingMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council G9815508Medical Research Council MC_PC_15018Medical Research Council MC_PC_19009Medical Research Council MC UU 00011/3Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Mendelian Randomization AnalysisBody Mass IndexComputer SimulationHumansModels, StatisticalSelection BiasSmokingALSPACHeckman selection modelinstrumental variablesMendelian randomizationmissing not at randomselection bias

Identifiers

PMID39039030
PMCPMC13022821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.