» Articles » PMID: 19689488

Quantification of Collider-stratification Bias and the Birthweight Paradox

Overview
Date 2009 Aug 20
PMID 19689488
Citations 61
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The 'birthweight paradox' describes the phenomenon whereby birthweight-specific mortality curves cross when stratified on other exposures, most notably cigarette smoking. The paradox has been noted widely in the literature and numerous explanations and corrections have been suggested. Recently, causal diagrams have been used to illustrate the possibility for collider-stratification bias in models adjusting for birthweight. When two variables share a common effect, stratification on the variable representing that effect induces a statistical relation between otherwise independent factors. This bias has been proposed to explain the birthweight paradox. Causal diagrams may illustrate sources of bias, but are limited to describing qualitative effects. In this paper, we provide causal diagrams that illustrate the birthweight paradox and use a simulation study to quantify the collider-stratification bias under a range of circumstances. Considered circumstances include exposures with and without direct effects on neonatal mortality, as well as with and without indirect effects acting through birthweight on neonatal mortality. The results of these simulations illustrate that when the birthweight-mortality relation is subject to substantial uncontrolled confounding, the bias on estimates of effect adjusted for birthweight may be sufficient to yield opposite causal conclusions, i.e. a factor that poses increased risk appears protective. Effects on stratum-specific birthweight-mortality curves were considered to illustrate the connection between collider-stratification bias and the crossing of the curves. The simulations demonstrate the conditions necessary to give rise to empirical evidence of the paradox.

Citing Articles

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances exposure is associated with polycystic ovary syndrome risk among women attending a fertility clinic.

Zhang Y, Martin L, Mustieles V, Ghaly M, Archer M, Sun Y Sci Total Environ. 2024; 950:175313.

PMID: 39117221 PMC: 11357523. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.175313.


Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids: The Evolution of the ALPS Trial.

Gyamfi-Bannerman C Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2024; 67(2):399-410.

PMID: 38688083 PMC: 11068095. DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000865.


Identifying characteristics and clinical conditions associated with hand grip strength in adults: the Project Baseline Health Study.

Taylor K, Carroll M, Short S, Goode A Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):8937.

PMID: 38637523 PMC: 11026445. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-55978-7.


Investigating the "sex paradox" in pulmonary arterial hypertension: Results from the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry (PHAR).

DesJardin J, Kime N, Kolaitis N, Kronmal R, Lammi M, Mathai S J Heart Lung Transplant. 2024; 43(6):901-910.

PMID: 38360160 PMC: 11500812. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2024.02.004.


Cohort selection and the estimation of racial disparity in mortality of extremely preterm neonates.

Gould J, Bennett M, Profit J, Lee H Pediatr Res. 2023; 95(3):792-801.

PMID: 37580552 PMC: 10899100. DOI: 10.1038/s41390-023-02766-0.


References
1.
Schisterman E, Whitcomb B, Buck Louis G, Louis T . Lipid adjustment in the analysis of environmental contaminants and human health risks. Environ Health Perspect. 2005; 113(7):853-7. PMC: 1257645. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.7640. View

2.
Kaufman J, MacLehose R, Kaufman S . A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation. Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2004; 1(1):4. PMC: 526390. DOI: 10.1186/1742-5573-1-4. View

3.
Greenland S, Pearl J, Robins J . Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology. 1999; 10(1):37-48. View

4.
Hernan M, Hernandez-Diaz S, Robins J . A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology. 2004; 15(5):615-25. DOI: 10.1097/01.ede.0000135174.63482.43. View

5.
Wilcox A, Russell I . Perinatal mortality: standardizing for birthweight is biased. Am J Epidemiol. 1983; 118(6):857-64. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113704. View