scholarly journals Measurement errors in the binary instrumental variable model

Biometrika ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 238-245
Author(s):  
Zhichao Jiang ◽  
Peng Ding

Summary Instrumental variable methods can identify causal effects even when the treatment and outcome are confounded. We study the problem of imperfect measurements of the binary instrumental variable, treatment and outcome. We first consider nondifferential measurement errors, that is, the mismeasured variable does not depend on other variables given its true value. We show that the measurement error of the instrumental variable does not bias the estimate, that the measurement error of the treatment biases the estimate away from zero, and that the measurement error of the outcome biases the estimate toward zero. Moreover, we derive sharp bounds on the causal effects without additional assumptions. These bounds are informative because they exclude zero. We then consider differential measurement errors, and focus on sensitivity analyses in those settings.

Author(s):  
Alice R. Carter ◽  
Eleanor Sanderson ◽  
Gemma Hammerton ◽  
Rebecca C. Richmond ◽  
George Davey Smith ◽  
...  

AbstractMediation analysis seeks to explain the pathway(s) through which an exposure affects an outcome. Traditional, non-instrumental variable methods for mediation analysis experience a number of methodological difficulties, including bias due to confounding between an exposure, mediator and outcome and measurement error. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can be used to improve causal inference for mediation analysis. We describe two approaches that can be used for estimating mediation analysis with MR: multivariable MR (MVMR) and two-step MR. We outline the approaches and provide code to demonstrate how they can be used in mediation analysis. We review issues that can affect analyses, including confounding, measurement error, weak instrument bias, interactions between exposures and mediators and analysis of multiple mediators. Description of the methods is supplemented by simulated and real data examples. Although MR relies on large sample sizes and strong assumptions, such as having strong instruments and no horizontally pleiotropic pathways, our simulations demonstrate that these methods are unaffected by confounders of the exposure or mediator and the outcome and non-differential measurement error of the exposure or mediator. Both MVMR and two-step MR can be implemented in both individual-level MR and summary data MR. MR mediation methods require different assumptions to be made, compared with non-instrumental variable mediation methods. Where these assumptions are more plausible, MR can be used to improve causal inference in mediation analysis.


Biometrika ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 987-994 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Ramsahai ◽  
S. L. Lauritzen

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 601-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irwin Guttman ◽  
Ulrich Menzefricke

We consider a hierarchical linear regression model where the regression parameters for the units have a multivariate normal distribution whose parameters are unknown. Several replications are available for each unit. The design matrices for the units need not be the same. A complicating feature of the model is that each observation is subject to measurement error. The objective of the paper is to derive the predictive distribution of the “true” value of the response at a given design point. A Bayesian treatment is given to the problem. In addition to standard prior distributions, other prior distributions are considered. The calculations are done with the Gibbs sampler. An example is discussed in detail.


Biometrika ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. asw064
Author(s):  
Linbo Wang ◽  
James M. Robins ◽  
Thomas S. Richardson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document