Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders.
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.
Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA. tvanderw@hsph.harvard.edu
Tyler J
TJ
Vanderweele
Onyebuchi A
OA
Arah
D015982:Bias; D015986:Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic; D016021:Epidemiologic Studies; D006801:Humans; D015233:Models, Statistical; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity