Sensitivity analysis in observational research: Introducing the E-Value

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 167, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 268-274

  Van Der Weele, Tyler J ^a   Ding, Peng ^b  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; CAUSALITY; E VALUE; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES AS TOPIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 85027461408     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: 15393704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/M16-2607     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Wasserstein RL, Lazar NL. The ASA's statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016;70:129-33.
2. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ, eds. Statistics with Confidence. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Books; 2000.
3. Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 8th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning; 2015.
4. Pagano M, Gavreau K. Principles of Biostatistics. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole; 2000.
5. Greenland S, Senn SJ, Rothman KJ, Carlin JB, Poole C, Goodman SN, et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31:337-50. [PMID: 27209009] doi:10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3
6. Goodman S. A dirty dozen: twelve p-value misconceptions. Semin Hematol. 2008;45:135-40. [PMID: 18582619] doi:10.1053/j.semin hematol.2008.04.003
7. Greenland S. Null misinterpretation in statistical testing and its impact on health risk assessment. Prev Med. 2011;53:225-8. [PMID: 21871481] doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.08.010
8. Greenland S, Poole C. Problems in common interpretations of statistics in scientific articles, expert reports, and testimony. Jurimetrics. 2011;51:11329.
9. Sterne JA, Davey Smith G. Sifting the evidence - what's wrong with significance tests? BMJ. 2001;322:226-31. [PMID: 11159626]
10. Stang A, Poole C, Kuss O. The ongoing tyranny of statistical significance testing in biomedical research. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25: 225-30. [PMID: 20339903] doi:10.1007/s10654-010-9440-x
11. Goodman SN. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The P value fallacy. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:995-1004. [PMID: 10383371]
12. Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med. 1965;58:295-300. [PMID: 14283879]
13. Greenland S. Randomization, statistics, and causal inference. Epidemiology. 1990;1:421-9. [PMID: 2090279]
14. Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Sensitivity analysis and bounds. In: Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences. New York: Cambridge Univ Pr; 2015:496-512.
15. Hernan MA, Robins JR. Confounding. In: Causal Inference. 11 September 2016. Accessed at https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1268/2016/09/hernanrobins-v1.10.31.pdf on 22 May 2017.
16. Rosenbaum PR. Sensitivity to hidden bias. In: Observational Studies. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2002:105-70.
17. Rosenbaum PR. Design sensitivity. In: Design of Observational Studies. New York: Springer; 2010:269-71.
18. Rosenbaum PR. Design sensitivity and efficiency in observational studies. J Am Stat Assoc. 2010;105:692-702.
19. Greenland S. Multiple-bias modeling for analysis of observational data. J R Stat Soc Ser A. 2005;168:267-308.
20. Lash TL, Fox MP, Fink AK. Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data. New York: Springer; 2009.
21. Greenland S, Lash TL. Bias analysis. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, eds. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008:345-80.
22. Cornfield J, Haenszel W, Hammond EC, Lilienfeld AM, Shimkin MB, Wynder EL. Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22:173-203. [PMID: 13621204]
23. Victora CG, Smith PG, Vaughan JP, Nobre LC, Lombardi C, Teixeira AM, et al. Evidence for protection by breast-feeding against infant deaths from infectious diseases in Brazil. Lancet. 1987;2:319-22. [PMID: 2886775]
24. Bross ID. Spurious effects from an extraneous variable. J Chronic Dis. 1966;19:637-47. [PMID: 5966011]
25. Schlesselman JJ. Assessing effects of confounding variables. Am J Epidemiol. 1978;108:3-8. [PMID: 685974]
26. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 1983;45:212-8.
27. Lin DY, Psaty BM, Kronmal RA. Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies. Biometrics. 1998;54:948-63. [PMID: 9750244]
28. Imbens GW. Sensitivity to exogeneity assumptions in program evaluation. Am Econ Rev. 2003;93:126-32.
29. Vanderweele TJ, Arah OA. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders. Epidemiology. 2011;22:42-52. [PMID: 21052008] doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181f74493
30. Bross ID. Pertinency of an extraneous variable. J Chronic Dis. 1967;20:487-95. [PMID: 6028268]
31. Lee WC. Bounding the bias of unmeasured factors with confounding and effect modifying potentials. Stat Med. 2011;30:1007-17.
32. Robins JM, Scharfstein D, Rotnitzky A. Sensitivity analysis for selection bias and unmeasured confounding in missing data and causal inference models. In: Halloran E, Berry D, eds. Statistical Models for Epidemiology, the Environment, and Clinical Trials. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2000:1-94.
33. McCandless LC, Gustafson P, Levy A. Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies. Stat Med. 2007;26:2331-47. [PMID: 16998821]
34. Brumback BA, Hernán MA, Haneuse SJ, Robins JM. Sensitivity analyses for unmeasured confounding assuming a marginal structural model for repeated measures. Stat Med. 2004;23:749-67. [PMID: 14981673]
35. VanderWeele TJ. Sensitivity analysis for mediation. In: Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction. New York: Oxford Univ Pr; 2015:66-97.
36. VanderWeele TJ. Sensitivity analysis for contagion effects in social networks. Sociol Methods Res. 2011;40:240-55. [PMID: 25580037]
37. Ding P, VanderWeele TJ. Sensitivity analysis without assumptions. Epidemiology. 2016;27:368-77. [PMID: 26841057] doi:10.1097/EDE.0000000000000457
38. Gilbert PB, Bosch RJ, Hudgens MG. Sensitivity analysis for the assessment of causal vaccine effects on viral load in HIV vaccine trials. Biometrics. 2003;59:531-41. [PMID: 14601754]
39. Chiba Y, VanderWeele TJ. A simple method for principal strata effects when the outcome has been truncated due to death. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;173:745-51. [PMID: 21354986] doi:10.1093/aje/kwq418
40. Huang TH, Lee WC. Bounding formulas for selection bias. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;182:868-72. [PMID: 26519426] doi:10.1093/aje/kwv130
41. Rosenbaum PR. Discussing hidden bias in observational studies. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:901-5. [PMID: 1952480]
42. Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, Chew P, Magula N, DeVine D, et al. Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment no. 153. (Prepared by Tufts-New England Medical Center Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. 290-02-0022.) AHRQ publication no. 07-E007. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; April 2007.
43. Moorman PG, Calingaert B, Palmieri RT, Iversen ES, Bentley RC, Halabi S, et al. Hormonal risk factors for ovarian cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167: 1059-69. [PMID: 18303003] doi:10.1093/aje/kwn006
44. Taubes G. Epidemiology faces its limits. Science. 1995;269: 164-9. [PMID: 7618077]
45. VanderWeele TJ. On a square-root transformation of the odds ratio for a common outcome. Epidemiology. 2017. [Forthcoming].
46. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Converting among effect sizes. In: Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009:45-51.
47. Hasselblad V, Hedges LV. Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests. Psychol Bull. 1995;117:167-78. [PMID: 7870860]