Causal inference in multi-cohort studies using the target trial framework to identify and minimize sources of bias.

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American journal of epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1093/aje/kwae405
Marnie Downes, Meredith O'Connor, Craig A Olsson, David Burgner, Sharon Goldfeld, Elizabeth A Spry, George Patton, Margarita Moreno-Betancur
{"title":"Causal inference in multi-cohort studies using the target trial framework to identify and minimize sources of bias.","authors":"Marnie Downes, Meredith O'Connor, Craig A Olsson, David Burgner, Sharon Goldfeld, Elizabeth A Spry, George Patton, Margarita Moreno-Betancur","doi":"10.1093/aje/kwae405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Longitudinal cohort studies, which follow a group of individuals over time, provide the opportunity to examine causal effects of complex exposures on long-term health outcomes. Utilizing data from multiple cohorts has the potential to add further benefit by improving precision of estimates through data pooling and by allowing examination of effect heterogeneity through replication of analyses across cohorts. However, the interpretation of findings can be complicated by biases that may be compounded when pooling data, or, contribute to discrepant findings when analyses are replicated. The \"target trial\" is a powerful tool for guiding causal inference in single-cohort studies. Here we extend this conceptual framework to address the specific challenges that can arise in the multi-cohort setting. By representing a clear definition of the target estimand, the target trial provides a central point of reference against which biases arising in each cohort and from data pooling can be systematically assessed. Consequently, analyses can be designed to reduce these biases and the resulting findings appropriately interpreted in light of potential remaining biases. We use a case study to demonstrate the framework and its potential to strengthen causal inference in multi-cohort studies through improved analysis design and clarity in the interpretation of findings. Special Collection: N/A.</p>","PeriodicalId":7472,"journal":{"name":"American journal of epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwae405","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Longitudinal cohort studies, which follow a group of individuals over time, provide the opportunity to examine causal effects of complex exposures on long-term health outcomes. Utilizing data from multiple cohorts has the potential to add further benefit by improving precision of estimates through data pooling and by allowing examination of effect heterogeneity through replication of analyses across cohorts. However, the interpretation of findings can be complicated by biases that may be compounded when pooling data, or, contribute to discrepant findings when analyses are replicated. The "target trial" is a powerful tool for guiding causal inference in single-cohort studies. Here we extend this conceptual framework to address the specific challenges that can arise in the multi-cohort setting. By representing a clear definition of the target estimand, the target trial provides a central point of reference against which biases arising in each cohort and from data pooling can be systematically assessed. Consequently, analyses can be designed to reduce these biases and the resulting findings appropriately interpreted in light of potential remaining biases. We use a case study to demonstrate the framework and its potential to strengthen causal inference in multi-cohort studies through improved analysis design and clarity in the interpretation of findings. Special Collection: N/A.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用目标试验框架在多队列研究中进行因果推断,以识别并尽量减少偏差来源。
纵向队列研究对一组个体进行长期跟踪,为研究复杂暴露对长期健康结果的因果影响提供了机会。利用来自多个队列的数据有可能带来更多益处,如通过数据汇集提高估算的精确度,以及通过在不同队列间复制分析来检验效应的异质性。然而,对研究结果的解释可能会因偏差而变得复杂,这些偏差可能会在汇集数据时加剧,或者在重复分析时导致研究结果的差异。目标试验 "是指导单队列研究中因果推断的有力工具。在此,我们扩展了这一概念框架,以应对多队列研究中可能出现的具体挑战。通过对目标估计值的明确定义,目标试验提供了一个中心参考点,可据此系统地评估每个队列和数据池产生的偏差。因此,在设计分析时可以减少这些偏差,并根据潜在的其余偏差对分析结果进行适当解释。我们通过一个案例研究来展示该框架及其通过改进分析设计和清晰解释研究结果来加强多队列研究中因果推断的潜力。特别收藏:不详。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of epidemiology
American journal of epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Epidemiology is the oldest and one of the premier epidemiologic journals devoted to the publication of empirical research findings, opinion pieces, and methodological developments in the field of epidemiologic research. It is a peer-reviewed journal aimed at both fellow epidemiologists and those who use epidemiologic data, including public health workers and clinicians.
期刊最新文献
Assessing trends in internalizing symptoms among racialized and minoritized adolescents: results from the Monitoring the Future Study 2005-2020. Targeted learning with an undersmoothed LASSO propensity score model for large-scale covariate adjustment in health-care database studies. DNA methylation as a possible mechanism linking childhood adversity and health: results from a 2-sample mendelian randomization study. Invited commentary: it's not all about residual confounding-a plea for quantitative bias analysis for epidemiologic researchers and educators. Validation of algorithms in studies based on routinely collected health data: general principles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1