1 / 17

Adjusting for Time-Varying Confounding in Survival Analysis

Adjusting for Time-Varying Confounding in Survival Analysis. Jennifer S. Barber Susan A. Murphy Natalya Verbitsky University of Michigan. Outline. Introduction/motivation Weighting method Empirical example Simulation Conclusions. Introduction/Motivation. Causal questions

Thomas
Download Presentation

Adjusting for Time-Varying Confounding in Survival Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Adjusting for Time-Varying Confounding in Survival Analysis Jennifer S. Barber Susan A. Murphy Natalya Verbitsky University of Michigan

  2. Outline • Introduction/motivation • Weighting method • Empirical example • Simulation • Conclusions

  3. Introduction/Motivation • Causal questions • Experimental setting • Social science = observational data • Confounders • Standard statistical method • Biased if confounders affected by exposure (i.e., endogenous) • Time-varying confounders

  4. Research Question “If more children in poor countries attend school, would more couples limit their total family size via sterilization?” Children’s school attendance º Sterilization

  5. Weighting Method • Developed by Robins and colleagues • Marginal Structural Models (MSMs) • Uses sample weights (inverse-probability-of-exposure weights) • Clear research question/hypothesis

  6. Two pie chart slides here.

  7. Empirical Example • Chitwan Valley Family Study • Representative sample of 171 neighborhoods • Each adult in neighborhood interviewed (also spouses) • 97% response rate • Retrospective histories of change in each neighborhood • Retrospective histories of individual behavior using life history calendar

  8. Two important measured time-varying variables that are likely confounders: • Availability of schools near neighborhood • Total number of children born to couple • Both are potentially endogenous to children’s education º sterilization • Also multiple time-invariant confounders • Parents’ education • Parents’ exposure to schools during childhood • Religious/ethnic/racial group • Distance to nearest town

  9. Comparison of three methods • Naïve (ignores time-varying confounding) if exposure had been randomized, we would fit the model: logit (pij) = $0 + $1exposij + $2subpopj • Standard (includes time-varying confounders as covariates in the model) logit (pij) = $0 + $1exposij + $2subpopj + $3 confoundersij • Weighted (MSM) logit (pij) = $0 + $1exposij + $2subpopj

  10. Table 5. Logistic regression estimates (with robust standard errors) of hazard of sterilization on children’s education

  11. Primary Assumptions of the Weighting Method • Assumption 1: • No direct unmeasured confounders (sequential ignorability) • Note: same as the first assumption underlying the standard method • Assumption 2: • No past confounder patterns exclude particular levels of exposure • e.g., even if the couple does not live near a school, it is still possible that they have sent a child to school (a distant school)

  12. Simulated Data • 1,000 datasets of 1,000 cases • constructed so that expos does not affect resp

  13. Simulated Data • Comparison of same three methods: • Naïve (ignores time-varying confounding) • Standard (includes time-varying confounders as covariates in the model) • Weighted (MSM) • Assign a substantive meaning to each variable

  14. Note: this page is for figure 5

  15. Results of Simulation • Naïve method produces biased estimators • Standard method produces biased estimators • Weighted method reduces bias (even when there is unmeasured confounding) • The Unexpected Finding

  16. Conclusions • Clear research question, clear hypotheses • Collect your own data • Weighting method “does no harm” • Look out for confounder/exposure patterns that are near impossible

More Related