Instrumental variable analyses and selection bias

Epidemiology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 396-398

  Canan, Chelsea ^a   Lesko, Catherine ^a   Lauc, Bryan ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLE ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE; SELECTION BIAS; SIMULATION; CAUSALITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY;

CAUSALITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; PROBABILITY; SELECTION BIAS;

EID: 85011884574     PISSN: 10443983     EISSN: 15315487     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000639     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Ginsberg W. Instrumental variables: some generalizations. Am Stat. 1971;25:25.
2. Newhouse JP, McClellan M. Econometrics in outcomes research: The use of instrumental variables. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:17-34.
3. Greenland S. An introduction To instrumental variables for epidemiologists. Int J Epidemiol. 2000;29:1102.
4. Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91:444-455.
5. Hernán MA, Robins JM. Instruments for causal inference: An epidemiologist's dream? Epidemiology. 2006;17:360-372.
6. Martens EP, Pestman WR, de Boer A, Belitser SV, Klungel OH. Instrumental variables: Application and limitations. Epidemiology. 2006;17:260-267.
7. Hogan JW, Lancaster T. Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 2004;13:17-48.
8. Bosco JL, Silliman RA, Thwin SS, et al. A most stubborn bias: no adjustment method fully resolves confounding by indication in observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:64-74.
9. Fang G, Brooks JM, Chrischilles EA. Comparison of instrumental variable analysis using a new instrument with risk adjustment methods to reduce confounding by indication. Am J Epidemiol. 2012;175:1142-1151.
10. Angrist JD, Imbens GW. Two-stage least squares estimation of average causal effects in models with variable treatment intensity. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90:431-442.
11. Swanson SA, Hernán MA. Commentary: how to report instrumental variable analyses (suggestions welcome). Epidemiology. 2013;24:370-374.
12. Howe CJ, Cole SR, Lau B, Napravnik S, Eron JJ Jr. Selection bias due to loss to follow up in cohort studies. Epidemiology. 2016;27:91-97.
13. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall; 1993.
14. Swanson SA, Robins JM, Miller M, Hernán MA. Selecting on treatment: A pervasive form of bias in instrumental variable analyses. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;181:191-197.
15. Ertefaie A, Small D, Flory JH, Hennessy S. Selection bias when using instrumental variable methods to compare two treatments but more than two treatments are available. Int J Biostatisics. 2015:1-15.
16. Hernán MA, Hernández-Díaz S, Robins JM. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology. 2004;15:615-625.
17. Boef AG, le Cessie S, Dekkers OM. Mendelian randomization studies in the elderly. Epidemiology. 2015;26:e15-e16.
18. Pearl J. On a class of bias-amplifying variables that endanger effect estimates. Analysis. 2012;July(July):417-424.
19. Robins JM, Finkelstein DM. Correcting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS Clinical Trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests. Biometrics. 2000;56: 779-788.