欢迎来到麦多课文档分享! | 帮助中心 海量文档,免费浏览,给你所需,享你所想!
麦多课文档分享
全部分类
  • 标准规范>
  • 教学课件>
  • 考试资料>
  • 办公文档>
  • 学术论文>
  • 行业资料>
  • 易语言源码>
  • ImageVerifierCode 换一换
    首页 麦多课文档分享 > 资源分类 > PPT文档下载
    分享到微信 分享到微博 分享到QQ空间

    Causal Diagrams for Epidemiological Research.ppt

    • 资源ID:379379       资源大小:277KB        全文页数:50页
    • 资源格式: PPT        下载积分:2000积分
    快捷下载 游客一键下载
    账号登录下载
    微信登录下载
    二维码
    微信扫一扫登录
    下载资源需要2000积分(如需开发票,请勿充值!)
    邮箱/手机:
    温馨提示:
    如需开发票,请勿充值!快捷下载时,用户名和密码都是您填写的邮箱或者手机号,方便查询和重复下载(系统自动生成)。
    如需开发票,请勿充值!如填写123,账号就是123,密码也是123。
    支付方式: 支付宝扫码支付    微信扫码支付   
    验证码:   换一换

    加入VIP,交流精品资源
     
    账号:
    密码:
    验证码:   换一换
      忘记密码?
        
    友情提示
    2、PDF文件下载后,可能会被浏览器默认打开,此种情况可以点击浏览器菜单,保存网页到桌面,就可以正常下载了。
    3、本站不支持迅雷下载,请使用电脑自带的IE浏览器,或者360浏览器、谷歌浏览器下载即可。
    4、本站资源下载后的文档和图纸-无水印,预览文档经过压缩,下载后原文更清晰。
    5、试题试卷类文档,如果标题没有明确说明有答案则都视为没有答案,请知晓。

    Causal Diagrams for Epidemiological Research.ppt

    1、Causal Diagrams for Epidemiological Research,Eyal Shahar, MD, MPH Professor Division of Epidemiology & Biostatistics Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health The University of Arizona,What is it and why does it matter?,A tool (method) that: clarifies our wordy or vague causal thoughts about t

    2、he research topichelps us to decide which covariates should enter the statistical modeland which should notunifies our understanding of confounding bias, selection bias, and information bias,What is the key question in a non-randomized study?,When estimating the effect of E (“exposure”) on D (“disea

    3、se”), what should we adjust for?orConfounder selection strategy,The “change-in-estimate” method List “potential confounders” Adjust for (condition on) potential confounders Compare adjusted estimate to crude estimate (or “fully adjusted” to “partially adjusted”) Decide whether “potential confounders

    4、” were “real confounders” Decide how much confounding existedPremise: The data informs us about confounding.,Adjusting for Confounders Common Practice,Are we asking too much from the data?,Adjusting for Confounders Common Practice,What is “a potential confounder”? Typically, “a cause of the disease

    5、that is associated with the exposure”,E,D,Confounder,What is the effect of a confounder? Contributes to the crude (observed, marginal) association between E and D,Adjusting for Confounders Common Practice,Extension to multiple confounders,E,D,C1,E,D,C4,E,D,C2,E,D,C3,E,D,C5,E,D,C6,Adjusting for Confo

    6、unders Common Practice Problems,A sequence of isolated, independent, causal diagrams but C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, might be connected causallyUnidirectional arrow = a causal direction but what is the meaning of the bidirectional arrow?Even with a single confounder, the “change-in-estimate” method could fa

    7、il,Adjusting for Confounders Problems,An example where the “change-in-estimate” method fails,E,D,C,U1,U2,The crude estimate may be closer to the truth than the C-adjusted estimate To be explained,Alternative A Causal Diagram,A method for selecting covariates Extension of the confounder triangle Prem

    8、ises displayed in the diagram New terms: Path Collider on a path Confounding path,Selected references,Pearl J. Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. 2000. Cambridge University PressGreenland S et al. Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 1999;10:37-48Robins JM. Data, design

    9、, and background knowledge in etiologic inference. Epidemiology 2001;11:313-320Hernan MA et al. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology 2004;15:615-625Shahar E. Causal diagrams for encoding and evaluation of information bias. J Eval Clin Pract (forthcoming),A Causal Diagram Notation an

    10、d Terms,An arrow=causal direction between two variables,E,D,An arrow could abbreviate both direct and indirect effects,E,D,could summarize,E,D,U2,U3,U1,A Causal Diagram Notation and Terms,A path between E and D: any sequence of causal arrows that connects E to D,E,D,E,U1,U2,D,E,U1,U2,D,E,U1,U2,D,A C

    11、ausal Diagram Notation and Terms,Circularity (self-causation) does not exist: Directed Acyclic Graph,E,U1,U2,D,E,U1,U2,D,E and U2 collide at U1,A collider on the path between E and D,A Causal Diagram Notation and Terms,A confounding path for the effect of E on D: Any path between E and D that meets

    12、the following criteria: The arrow next to E points to E There are no colliders on the path,E,D,C,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,In short: a path showing a common cause of E and D,The paths below are NOT confounding paths for the effect of E on D,E,D,C,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,E,D,C,U1,U3,V1,V2,U2,V1,E,D,C,U1,U2,U3,V2,What ca

    13、n affect the association between E and D? (Why do we observe an association between two variables?),Causal path: E causes DCausal path: D causes EConfounding pathsAdjustment for colliders on a path from E to D,E,D,D,E,E,D,C,Later,Why does a confounding path affect the crude (marginal) association be

    14、tween E and D?,Intuitively: Association= being able to “guess” the value of one variable (D) from the value of another (E) ED allows us to guess D from E (and E from D) A confounding path allows for sequential guesses along the path,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,How can we block a confounding path between E

    15、and D?,Condition on a variable on the path (on any variable) Methods for conditioning Restriction Stratification Regression,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,A point to remember,We dont need to adjust for confounders (the top of the triangle.) Adjustment for any U or V below will do. U and V are surrogates for t

    16、he confounder C,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,Example,If the diagram below corresponds to reality, then we have several options for conditioning For example: On C and U2 Only on U2 Only on U3,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,What can affect the association between E and D?,Causal path: E causes DCausal path: D causes EC

    17、onfounding pathsAdjustment for colliders on a path from E to D,E,D,D,E,E,D,C,NOW!,Conditioning on a Collider A Trap,A collider may be viewed as the opposite of a confounder Collider and confounder are symmetrical entities, like matter and anti-matter,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,Conditioning on a Collider A

    18、 Trap,A path from E to D that contains a collider is NOT a confounding path. There is no transfer of “guesses” across a collider.A path from E to D that contains a collider does NOT generate an association between E and DConditioning on the collider, however, will turn that path into a confounding p

    19、ath.,Why?,Conditioning on a Collider A Trap,The horizontal line indicates an association (the possibility of “guesses”) that was induced by conditioning on a collider,E,D,U1,U2,U3,V1,V2,C,Properties of a Collider Intuitive Explanation,Brake condition(good, bad),Street condition(good, bad),Accident (

    20、yes, no),A dataset contains three variables for N cars: Brake condition (good/bad) Street condition in the owners town (good/bad) Involved in an accident in the owners town? (yes/no),Accident is a collider. Brake condition and street condition are not associated in the dataset. We cannot use the dat

    21、a to guess one from the other.,Properties of a Collider Intuitive Explanation,Why cant we make a guess from the data? Lets try. Suppose we are told: Car A has good brakes and car B has bad brakes. This information tells us nothing about the street condition in each owners town.,Intuition: a common e

    22、ffect (collider) does not induce an association between its causes (colliding variables),Properties of a Collider Intuitive Explanation,If, however, we condition (stratify) on the collider “accident”, we can make some guesses about the street condition from the brake condition.,Stratum #1 Accident =

    23、 yes,Properties of a Collider Intuitive Explanation,Similarly, in the other stratum,Stratum #2 Accident = no,Properties of a Collider,In summary: Conditioning on a collider creates an association between the colliding variables and, therefore, may open a confounding path,E,D,C,U1,U2,Before condition

    24、ing on C,After conditioning on C,E,D,C,U1,U2,Derivations,The “change-in-estimate” method could fail if we condition on colliders, and thereby open confounding pathsTo (rationally) select covariates for adjustment, we must commit to a causal diagram (premises)(But we often say that we dont know and c

    25、ant commit, and hope that the change-in-estimate method will work.),Causal inference, like all scientific inference, is conditional on premises (which may be false)not on ignorance,Derivations,Do not condition on colliders, if possible If you condition on a collider, Connect the colliding variables

    26、by a line Check if you opened a new confounding path Condition on another variable to block that new path,E,D,C,U1,U2,E,D,C,U1,U2,Conditioning on C alone,Conditioning on C and (U1 or U2),Practical advice,Study one exposure at a timeA model that may be good for exposure A might not be good for exposu

    27、re B (even if B is in the model)Never adjust for an effect of the exposureNever adjust for an effect of the diseaseNever select covariates by stepwise regressionNever look at p-values to decide on confounding (actually, never look at p-values),Extension to other problems of causal inquiry,Causation

    28、always remains uncertain, even if we deal with a single confounder,E,D,C,We draw,And naively condition on C,E,D,C,U1,U2,Unbeknown to us the reality happens to be,And our adjustment may fail,Extension to other problems of causal inquiry,Estimating the “direct” effect by conditioning on an intermediar

    29、y variable, I,E,I,D,We should remember that variable I may be a collider,E,I,Extension to other problems of causal inquiry,Causal diagrams explain the mechanism of selection bias Example:What happens if we estimate the effect of marital status on dementia in a sample of nursing home residents?Assume

    30、: no effectboth variables affect “place of residence” (home, or nursing home),Extension to other problems of causal inquiry,Marital status,Dementia,Place of residence (home, nursing home),By studying a sample of nursing home residents, we are conditioning on a collider (on a “sampling collider”) and

    31、 might create an association between marital status and dementia in that stratum,Extension to other problems of causal inquiry,Marital status,Dementia,Place of residence (home, nursing home),Nursing home,“Stratification”,Home,Extensions: control selection bias (Source: Hernan et al, Epidemiology 200

    32、4),Extensions: control selection bias (Source: Hernan et al, Epidemiology 2004),E,D,S (0,1),Estrogen,MI,F,S=1 (our case-control sample),S=0 (remainder of the source cohort),E,D,HRT,MI,Association of E and D was created,Extensions: information bias (LAST EXAMPLE),Summary Points,The “change-in-estimat

    33、e” method could fail if we condition on colliders, and thereby open confounding pathsThe theory of causal diagrams extends the idea of a confounder to the multi-confounder case Unification of confounding bias, selection bias, and information bias under a single theoretical framework,“Back-door algor

    34、ithm” Sufficient set for adjustment Minimally sufficient set Differential losses to follow-up Time-dependent confounders Interpretation of hazard ratios Conditioning on a common effect always induced an association between its causes, but this association could be restricted to some levels of the co

    35、mmon effect,Smoking status,FEV1,Sex,?,Age (young, old),Smoking drive(low, high),Physical activity(low, high),Asthma (yes, no),Smoking status,FEV1,Sex,?,Age (young, old),Smoking drive(low, high),Physical activity(low, high),Asthma (yes, no),Smoking status,FEV1,Sex,?,Age (young, old),Smoking drive(low

    36、, high),Physical activity(low, high),Asthma (yes, no),Hospitalization Statushospitalizednot hospitalized,Pneumonia,Ulcer,Coughing,Abdominal Pain,Pneumonia,Ulcer,Coughing,Abdominal Pain,Stratification,hospitalized patients,other patients,?,?,Example: Do men have higher systolic blood pressure than wo

    37、men? (In other words: estimate the gender effect on systolic blood pressure)The following table summarizes the answer to this question from two regression models,So, which is the true estimate and which is biased?,Gender,SBP,WHR,BMI,Z1,Z2,. .,Gender,SBP,WHR,BMI,Z1,Z2,. .,U,Gender,SBP,WHR,BMI,Z1,Z2,. .,U,


    注意事项

    本文(Causal Diagrams for Epidemiological Research.ppt)为本站会员(unhappyhay135)主动上传,麦多课文档分享仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知麦多课文档分享(点击联系客服),我们立即给予删除!




    关于我们 - 网站声明 - 网站地图 - 资源地图 - 友情链接 - 网站客服 - 联系我们

    copyright@ 2008-2019 麦多课文库(www.mydoc123.com)网站版权所有
    备案/许可证编号:苏ICP备17064731号-1 

    收起
    展开