BACKGROUND: Disease latency is defined as the time from disease initiation to disease diagnosis. Disease latency bias (DLB) can arise in epidemiological studies that examine latent outcomes, since the exact timing of the disease inception is unknown and might occur before exposure initiation, potentially leading to bias. Although DLB can affect epidemiological studies that examine different types of chronic disease (e.g. Alzheimer\'s disease, cancer etc), the manner by which DLB can introduce bias into these studies has not been previously elucidated. Information on the specific types of bias, and their structure, that can arise secondary to DLB is critical for researchers, to enable better understanding and control for DLB.
METHODS: Here we describe four scenarios by which DLB can introduce bias (through different structures) into epidemiological studies that address latent outcomes, using directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). We also discuss potential strategies to better understand, examine and control for DLB in these studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Using causal diagrams, we show that disease latency bias can affect results of epidemiological studies through: (i) unmeasured confounding; (ii) reverse causality; (iii) selection bias; (iv) bias through a mediator.
CONCLUSIONS: Disease latency bias is an important bias that can affect a number of epidemiological studies that address latent outcomes. Causal diagrams can assist researchers better identify and control for this bias.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies are frequently used to estimate the comparative effectiveness of different colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods due to the practical limitations and time needed to conduct large clinical trials. However, time-varying confounders, e.g. polyp detection in the last screening, can bias statistical results. Recently, generalized methods, or G-methods, have been used for the analysis of observational studies of CRC screening, given their ability to account for such time-varying confounders. Discretization, or the process of converting continuous functions into discrete counterparts, is required for G-methods when the treatment and outcomes are assessed at a continuous scale.
METHODS: This paper evaluates the interplay between time-varying confounding and discretization, which can induce bias in assessing screening effectiveness. We investigate this bias in evaluating the effect of different CRC screening methods that differ from each other in typical screening frequency.
CONCLUSIONS: First, using theory, we establish the direction of the bias. Then, we use simulations of hypothetical settings to study the bias magnitude for varying levels of discretization, frequency of screening and length of the study period. We develop a method to assess possible bias due to coarsening in simulated situations.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method can inform future studies of screening effectiveness, especially for CRC, by determining the choice of interval lengths where data are discretized to minimize bias due to coarsening while balancing computational costs.

Pharmacoepidemiologic studies using routinely collected data allow researchers to propose drugs for repurposing trials for dementia prevention or treatment. A recent cohort study reported a 54% lower dementia risk among users of sildenafil compared to users of certain cardiovascular medications. We caution that \"confounding by indication\" can arise when outcomes are compared between a drug of interest and an inappropriate comparator. Here, we emphasize important considerations in selecting an active comparator. We assess the implications of substantial risk of confounding by indication in pharmacoepidemiologic studies linking phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors to lower dementia risk.

BACKGROUND: Perceived discrimination in health care settings can have adverse consequences on mental health in minority groups. However, the association between perceived discrimination and mental health is prone to unmeasured confounding. The study aims to quantitatively evaluate the influence of unmeasured confounding in this association, using g-estimation.
METHODS: In a predominantly African American cohort, we applied g-estimation to estimate the association between perceived discrimination and mental health, adjusted and unadjusted for measured confounders. Mental health was measured using clinical diagnoses of anxiety, depression and bipolar disorder. Perceived discrimination was measured as the number of patient-reported discrimination events in health care settings. Measured confounders included demographic, socioeconomic, residential and health characteristics. The influence of confounding was denoted as α1 from g-estimation. We compared α1 for measured and unmeasured confounding.
RESULTS: Strong associations between perceived discrimination in health care settings and mental health outcomes were observed. For anxiety, the odds ratio (95% confidence interval) unadjusted and adjusted for measured confounders were 1.30 (1.21, 1.39) and 1.26 (1.17, 1.36), respectively. The α1 for measured confounding was -0.066. Unmeasured confounding with α1=0.200, which was over three times that of measured confounding, corresponds to an odds ratio of 1.12 (1.01, 1.24). Similar results were observed for other mental health outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with measured confounding, unmeasured that was three times measured confounding was not enough to explain away the association between perceived discrimination and mental health, suggesting that this association is robust to unmeasured confounding. This study provides a novel framework to quantitatively evaluate unmeasured confounding.

暂无摘要。

Epidemiological researchers often examine associations between risk factors and health outcomes in non-experimental designs. Observed associations may be causal or confounded by unmeasured factors. Sibling and co-twin control studies account for familial confounding by comparing exposure levels among siblings (or twins). If the exposure-outcome association is causal, the siblings should also differ regarding the outcome. However, such studies may sometimes introduce more bias than they alleviate. Measurement error in the exposure may bias results and lead to erroneous conclusions that truly causal exposure-outcome associations are confounded by familial factors. The current study used Monte Carlo simulations to examine bias due to measurement error in sibling control models when the observed exposure-outcome association is truly causal. The results showed that decreasing exposure reliability and increasing sibling-correlations in the exposure led to deflated exposure-outcome associations and inflated associations between the family mean of the exposure and the outcome. The risk of falsely concluding that causal associations were confounded was high in many situations. For example, when exposure reliability was 0.7 and the observed sibling-correlation was r = 0.4, about 30-90% of the samples (n = 2,000) provided results supporting a false conclusion of confounding, depending on how p-values were interpreted as evidence for a family effect on the outcome. The current results have practical importance for epidemiological researchers conducting or reviewing sibling and co-twin control studies and may improve our understanding of observed associations between risk factors and health outcomes. We have developed an app (SibSim) providing simulations of many situations not presented in this paper.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide. It has been known for some considerable time that radiation is associated with excess risk of CVD. A recent systematic review of radiation and CVD highlighted substantial inter-study heterogeneity in effect, possibly a result of confounding or modifications of radiation effect by non-radiation factors, in particular by the major lifestyle/environmental/medical risk factors and latent period.
METHODS: We assessed effects of confounding by lifestyle/environmental/medical risk factors on radiation-associated CVD and investigated evidence for modifying effects of these variables on CVD radiation dose-response, using data assembled for a recent systematic review.
RESULTS: There are 43 epidemiologic studies which are informative on effects of adjustment for confounding or risk modifying factors on radiation-associated CVD. Of these 22 were studies of groups exposed to substantial doses of medical radiation for therapy or diagnosis. The remaining 21 studies were of groups exposed at much lower levels of dose and/or dose rate. Only four studies suggest substantial effects of adjustment for lifestyle/environmental/medical risk factors on radiation risk of CVD; however, there were also substantial uncertainties in the estimates in all of these studies. There are fewer suggestions of effects that modify the radiation dose response; only two studies, both at lower levels of dose, report the most serious level of modifying effect.
CONCLUSIONS: There are still large uncertainties about confounding factors or lifestyle/environmental/medical variables that may influence radiation-associated CVD, although indications are that there are not many studies in which there are substantial confounding effects of these risk factors.

Propensity score methods are popular to control for confounding in observational biomedical studies of risk factors or medical treatments. This paper focused on aspects of propensity score methods that often remain undiscussed, including unmeasured confounding, missing data, variable selection, statistical efficiency, estimands, the positivity assumption, and predictive performance of the propensity score model.

BACKGROUND: Mediation analysis is a powerful tool to identify factors mediating the causal pathway of exposure to health outcomes. Mediation analysis has been extended to study a large number of potential mediators in high-dimensional data settings. The presence of confounding in observational studies is inevitable. Hence, it\'s an essential part of high-dimensional mediation analysis (HDMA) to adjust for the potential confounders. Although the propensity score (PS) related method such as propensity score regression adjustment (PSR) and inverse probability weighting (IPW) has been proposed to tackle this problem, the characteristics with extreme propensity score distribution of the PS-based method would result in the biased estimation.
METHODS: In this article, we integrated the overlapping weighting (OW) technique into HDMA workflow and proposed a concise and powerful high-dimensional mediation analysis procedure consisting of OW confounding adjustment, sure independence screening (SIS), de-biased Lasso penalization, and joint-significance testing underlying the mixture null distribution. We compared the proposed method with the existing method consisting of PS-based confounding adjustment, SIS, minimax concave penalty (MCP) variable selection, and classical joint-significance testing.
RESULTS: Simulation studies demonstrate the proposed procedure has the best performance in mediator selection and estimation. The proposed procedure yielded the highest true positive rate, acceptable false discovery proportion level, and lower mean square error. In the empirical study based on the GSE117859 dataset in the Gene Expression Omnibus database using the proposed method, we found that smoking history may lead to the estimated natural killer (NK) cell level reduction through the mediation effect of some methylation markers, mainly including methylation sites cg13917614 in CNP gene and cg16893868 in LILRA2 gene.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method has higher power, sufficient false discovery rate control, and precise mediation effect estimation. Meanwhile, it is feasible to be implemented with the presence of confounders. Hence, our method is worth considering in HDMA studies.

Sporadic fundic gland polyps (FGPs) progress, albeit rarely, to dysplasia and cancer. Two meta-analyses, including 8 and 11 studies, concluded that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) were associated with FGPs. Intervention is considered unnecessary when FGPs have a background of PPIs use. Both meta-analyses, however, disregarded known confounders: age, sex, endoscopy indications, study design (prospective or retrospective), duration of PPI use, and H. pylori infection. Confounders are known to invalidate meta-analyses. We followed PRIXMA guidelines and searched the literature for studies on FGPs in PPI-users and PPI-nonusers. In the 22 studies searched, we compared FGPs in PPI-users (n = 6534) and PPI-nonusers (n = 41 115). Heterogeneity was significant (Cochran Q = 277.8, P < 0.0001; I2 = 92.8%), annulling meta-analysis performed by blanket tallying. To offset the above confounders, we matched PPI-users and PPI-nonusers by (a) age and sex (n = 4300 and 29 307, respectively) and (b) their propensity scores derived from the confounders (n = 2950 and 4729, respectively). After both matching, FGPs were not significantly different between PPI-users and PPI-nonusers [odds ratio (OR) = 1.1, P = 0.3078; OR = 0.9, P = 0.3258, respectively]. Furthermore, FGP frequency did not correlate with increasing duration of PPI use (Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients = 0.1162, 0.0386, P < 0.6064, 0.8646, respectively); it was not significantly different between any of the duration periods of observation, namely, <10, 10-20, 20-40, >40 months, nor was it significantly different between PPI-users and PPI-nonusers within each duration period (P > 0.05). We conclude that PPIs are not associated with FGPs, implying that a background history of PPI use is not a justification for nonintervention in the management of FGPs.