Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jan;22(1):42-52.
doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181f74493.

Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders

Affiliations

Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders

Tyler J Vanderweele et al. Epidemiology. 2011 Jan.

Abstract

Uncontrolled confounding in observational studies gives rise to biased effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis techniques can be useful in assessing the magnitude of these biases. In this paper, we use the potential outcomes framework to derive a general class of sensitivity-analysis formulas for outcomes, treatments, and measured and unmeasured confounding variables that may be categorical or continuous. We give results for additive, risk-ratio and odds-ratio scales. We show that these results encompass a number of more specific sensitivity-analysis methods in the statistics and epidemiology literature. The applicability, usefulness, and limits of the bias-adjustment formulas are discussed. We illustrate the sensitivity-analysis techniques that follow from our results by applying them to 3 different studies. The bias formulas are particularly simple and easy to use in settings in which the unmeasured confounding variable is binary with constant effect on the outcome across treatment levels.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kitagawa EM. Components of a difference between two rates. J Am Stat Assoc. 1955;50:1168–1194.
    1. Cornfield J, Haenszel W, Hammond EC, Lilienfeld AM, Shimkin MB, Wynder LL. Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22:173–203. - PubMed
    1. Bross ID. Spurious effects from an extraneous variable. J Chronic Dis. 1966;19:637–647. - PubMed
    1. Schlesselman JJ. Assessing effects of confounding variables. Am J Epidemiol. 1978;108:3–8. - PubMed
    1. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Vol 1: The Analysis of Case-Control Studies. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1980. chap 3. - PubMed

Publication types