Target parameters and bias in non-causal change-score analyses with measurement errors
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Target parameters and bias in non-causal change-score analyses with measurement errors. / Sjölander, Arvid; Gabriel, Erin E.; Ciocănea-Teodorescu, Iuliana.
In: European Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 38, No. 5, 2023, p. 501-509.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Target parameters and bias in non-causal change-score analyses with measurement errors
AU - Sjölander, Arvid
AU - Gabriel, Erin E.
AU - Ciocănea-Teodorescu, Iuliana
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - In studies where the outcome is a change-score, it is often debated whether or not the analysis should adjust for the baseline score. When the aim is to make causal inference, it has been argued that the two analyses (adjusted vs. unadjusted) target different causal parameters, which may both be relevant. However, these arguments are not applicable when the aim is to make predictions rather than to estimate causal effects. When the scores are measured with error, there have been attempts to quantify the bias resulting from adjustment for the (mis-)measured baseline score or lack thereof. However, these bias results have been derived under an unrealistically simple model, and assuming that the target parameter is the unadjusted (for the true baseline score) association, thus dismissing the adjusted association as a possibly relevant target parameter. In this paper we address these limitations. We argue that, even if the aim is to make predictions, there are two possibly relevant target parameters; one adjusted for the baseline score and one unadjusted. We consider both the simple case when there are no measurement errors, and the more complex case when the scores are measured with error. For the latter case, we consider a more realistic model than previous authors. Under this model we derive analytic expressions for the biases that arise when adjusting or not adjusting for the (mis-)measured baseline score, with respect to the two possible target parameters. Finally, we use these expressions to discuss when adjustment is warranted in change-score analyses.
AB - In studies where the outcome is a change-score, it is often debated whether or not the analysis should adjust for the baseline score. When the aim is to make causal inference, it has been argued that the two analyses (adjusted vs. unadjusted) target different causal parameters, which may both be relevant. However, these arguments are not applicable when the aim is to make predictions rather than to estimate causal effects. When the scores are measured with error, there have been attempts to quantify the bias resulting from adjustment for the (mis-)measured baseline score or lack thereof. However, these bias results have been derived under an unrealistically simple model, and assuming that the target parameter is the unadjusted (for the true baseline score) association, thus dismissing the adjusted association as a possibly relevant target parameter. In this paper we address these limitations. We argue that, even if the aim is to make predictions, there are two possibly relevant target parameters; one adjusted for the baseline score and one unadjusted. We consider both the simple case when there are no measurement errors, and the more complex case when the scores are measured with error. For the latter case, we consider a more realistic model than previous authors. Under this model we derive analytic expressions for the biases that arise when adjusting or not adjusting for the (mis-)measured baseline score, with respect to the two possible target parameters. Finally, we use these expressions to discuss when adjustment is warranted in change-score analyses.
KW - Bias
KW - Change-score analysis
KW - Lord’s paradox
KW - Measurement errors
U2 - 10.1007/s10654-023-00996-4
DO - 10.1007/s10654-023-00996-4
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 37043152
AN - SCOPUS:85152434144
VL - 38
SP - 501
EP - 509
JO - European Journal of Epidemiology
JF - European Journal of Epidemiology
SN - 0393-2990
IS - 5
ER -
ID: 358226671