14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Instrumental Variable Analysis with a Nonlinear Exposure–Outcome Relationship

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Instrumental variable methods can estimate the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome using observational data. Many instrumental variable methods assume that the exposure–outcome relation is linear, but in practice this assumption is often in doubt, or perhaps the shape of the relation is a target for investigation. We investigate this issue in the context of Mendelian randomization, the use of genetic variants as instrumental variables.

          Methods:

          Using simulations, we demonstrate the performance of a simple linear instrumental variable method when the true shape of the exposure–outcome relation is not linear. We also present a novel method for estimating the effect of the exposure on the outcome within strata of the exposure distribution. This enables the estimation of localized average causal effects within quantile groups of the exposure or as a continuous function of the exposure using a sliding window approach.

          Results:

          Our simulations suggest that linear instrumental variable estimates approximate a population-averaged causal effect. This is the average difference in the outcome if the exposure for every individual in the population is increased by a fixed amount. Estimates of localized average causal effects reveal the shape of the exposure–outcome relation for a variety of models. These methods are used to investigate the relations between body mass index and a range of cardiovascular risk factors.

          Conclusions:

          Nonlinear exposure–outcome relations should not be a barrier to instrumental variable analyses. When the exposure–outcome relation is not linear, either a population-averaged causal effect or the shape of the exposure–outcome relation can be estimated.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          'Mendelian randomization': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease?

          Associations between modifiable exposures and disease seen in observational epidemiology are sometimes confounded and thus misleading, despite our best efforts to improve the design and analysis of studies. Mendelian randomization-the random assortment of genes from parents to offspring that occurs during gamete formation and conception-provides one method for assessing the causal nature of some environmental exposures. The association between a disease and a polymorphism that mimics the biological link between a proposed exposure and disease is not generally susceptible to the reverse causation or confounding that may distort interpretations of conventional observational studies. Several examples where the phenotypic effects of polymorphisms are well documented provide encouraging evidence of the explanatory power of Mendelian randomization and are described. The limitations of the approach include confounding by polymorphisms in linkage disequilibrium with the polymorphism under study, that polymorphisms may have several phenotypic effects associated with disease, the lack of suitable polymorphisms for studying modifiable exposures of interest, and canalization-the buffering of the effects of genetic variation during development. Nevertheless, Mendelian randomization provides new opportunities to test causality and demonstrates how investment in the human genome project may contribute to understanding and preventing the adverse effects on human health of modifiable exposures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mendelian randomization as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference.

            In epidemiological research, the causal effect of a modifiable phenotype or exposure on a disease is often of public health interest. Randomized controlled trials to investigate this effect are not always possible and inferences based on observational data can be confounded. However, if we know of a gene closely linked to the phenotype without direct effect on the disease, it can often be reasonably assumed that the gene is not itself associated with any confounding factors - a phenomenon called Mendelian randomization. These properties define an instrumental variable and allow estimation of the causal effect, despite the confounding, under certain model restrictions. In this paper, we present a formal framework for causal inference based on Mendelian randomization and suggest using directed acyclic graphs to check model assumptions by visual inspection. This framework allows us to address limitations of the Mendelian randomization technique that have often been overlooked in the medical literature.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods.

              Exploring the possible reasons for heterogeneity between studies is an important aspect of conducting a meta-analysis. This paper compares a number of methods which can be used to investigate whether a particular covariate, with a value defined for each study in the meta-analysis, explains any heterogeneity. The main example is from a meta-analysis of randomized trials of serum cholesterol reduction, in which the log-odds ratio for coronary events is related to the average extent of cholesterol reduction achieved in each trial. Different forms of weighted normal errors regression and random effects logistic regression are compared. These analyses quantify the extent to which heterogeneity is explained, as well as the effect of cholesterol reduction on the risk of coronary events. In a second example, the relationship between treatment effect estimates and their precision is examined, in order to assess the evidence for publication bias. We conclude that methods which allow for an additive component of residual heterogeneity should be used. In weighted regression, a restricted maximum likelihood estimator is appropriate, although a number of other estimators are also available. Methods which use the original form of the data explicitly, for example the binomial model for observed proportions rather than assuming normality of the log-odds ratios, are now computationally feasible. Although such methods are preferable in principle, they often give similar results in practice. Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Epidemiology
                Epidemiology
                EDE
                Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
                1044-3983
                1531-5487
                November 2014
                30 September 2014
                : 25
                : 6
                : 877-885
                Affiliations
                From the [a ]Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom; and [b ]Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Stephen Burgess, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Strangeways Research Laboratory, 2 Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK. E-mail: sb452@ 123456medschl.cam.ac.uk .
                Article
                00014
                10.1097/EDE.0000000000000161
                4222800
                25166881
                0afea125-b442-42e5-a9a5-cbc5ae767bd4
                Copyright © 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 December 2013
                : 18 April 2014
                Categories
                Methods
                Custom metadata
                TRUE
                T

                Comments

                Comment on this article