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
. 2013 Sep;27(5):491-502.
doi: 10.1111/ppe.12073.

Accuracy loss due to selection bias in cohort studies with left truncation

Affiliations

Accuracy loss due to selection bias in cohort studies with left truncation

Enrique F Schisterman et al. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2013 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Selection is a common problem in paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, and truncation can be thought of as missing person time that can result in selection bias. Left truncation, also known as late or staggered entry, may induce selection bias and/or adversely affect precision. There are two kinds of left truncation: fixed left truncation where the start of follow-up is initiated at a set time, and variable left truncation where follow-up begins at a stochastically varying time-point.

Methods: Using data from a time-to-pregnancy study, augmented by a simulation study, we demonstrate the effects of fixed and variable truncation on estimates of the hazard ratio.

Results: First, fixed or variable non-differential left truncation results in a loss of precision. Fixed or variable differential left truncation results in a bias either towards or away from the null as well as a loss of precision. The extent and direction of this bias is a function of the size and direction of the association between exposure and outcome, and occurs in common scenarios and under a wide range of conditions.

Conclusions: As demonstrated in simulation studies, selection bias due to left truncation could have a serious impact on inferences, especially in the case of fixed or variable differential left truncation. When present in epidemiologic studies, proper accounting for left truncation is just as important as proper accounting for right censoring.

Keywords: Selection bias; fixed left truncation; variable left truncation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Graphs of fixed and variable truncation where deaths may occur before the start of follow-up, both differential and non-differential by exposure status. Horizontal lines represent subjects (solid = exposed, dashed = unexposed). Dots represent events. (a) Fixed truncation − non-differential; (b) fixed truncation − differential; (c) variable truncation − non-differential; (d) variable truncation − differential; (e) fixed and variable truncation − non-differential; (f) fixed and variable truncation − differential.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
(a and b) Number of pregnancies and Kaplan-Meier curves for time to pregnancy by smoking status for 586 women followed 12 monthsa. aAdministratively censored in month 13.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Pregnancy and l = log[−log(1 − pregnancy)] for fixed non-differential (top) and differential (bottom) truncation at months 0 (no truncation) and 6, the difference of l between non-smokers and smokers (δ = lnon-smoker − lsmoker) for truncation at months 0, 2, 4, and 6.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Pregnancy and l = log[−log(1 − pregnancy)] for variable non-differential (top) and differential (bottom) truncation with 0% (no truncation) and 40% truncation, the difference of l between non-smokers and smokers (δ = lnon-smoker − lsmoker) for 0%, 10%, 20%, and 40% truncation.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Flanders WD, Klein M. Properties of 2 counterfactual effect definitions of a point exposure. Epidemiology 2007; 18:453–460. - PubMed
    1. Response Greenland S. and follow-up bias in cohort studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 1977; 106:184–187. - PubMed
    1. Kleinbaum DG, Morgenstern H, Kupper LL. Selection bias in epidemiologic studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 1981; 113:452–463. - PubMed
    1. Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. Journal of Chronic Disease 1979; 32:51–63. - PubMed
    1. Hernan MA, Hernandez-Diaz S, Robins JM. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology 2004; 15:615–625. - PubMed