Homogeneity in the Instrument-exposure Association and Point Estimation Using Binary Instrumental Variables.


Journal

Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)
ISSN: 1531-5487
Titre abrégé: Epidemiology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9009644

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Nov 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 28 7 2022
medline: 28 7 2022
entrez: 27 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Interpreting instrumental variable results often requires further assumptions in addition to the core assumptions of relevance, independence, and the exclusion restriction. We assess whether instrument-exposure additive homogeneity renders the Wald estimand equal to the average derivative effect (ADE) in the case of a binary instrument and a continuous exposure. Instrument-exposure additive homogeneity is insufficient for ADE identification when the instrument is binary, the exposure is continuous, and the effect of the exposure on the outcome is nonlinear on the additive scale. For a binary exposure, the exposure-outcome effect is necessarily additive linear, so the homogeneity condition is sufficient. For binary instruments, instrument-exposure additive homogeneity identifies the ADE if the exposure is also binary. Otherwise, additional assumptions (such as additive linearity of the exposure-outcome effect) are required.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Interpreting instrumental variable results often requires further assumptions in addition to the core assumptions of relevance, independence, and the exclusion restriction.
METHODS METHODS
We assess whether instrument-exposure additive homogeneity renders the Wald estimand equal to the average derivative effect (ADE) in the case of a binary instrument and a continuous exposure.
RESULTS RESULTS
Instrument-exposure additive homogeneity is insufficient for ADE identification when the instrument is binary, the exposure is continuous, and the effect of the exposure on the outcome is nonlinear on the additive scale. For a binary exposure, the exposure-outcome effect is necessarily additive linear, so the homogeneity condition is sufficient.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
For binary instruments, instrument-exposure additive homogeneity identifies the ADE if the exposure is also binary. Otherwise, additional assumptions (such as additive linearity of the exposure-outcome effect) are required.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35895576
doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001527
pii: 00001648-202211000-00008
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

828-831

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_00011/1
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Références

Hernán MA, Robins JM. Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist’s dream? Epidemiology. 2006;17:360–372.
Didelez V, Sheehan N. Mendelian randomization as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007;16:309–330.
Hernán MA, Robins JM. Causal Inference: What If. Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2020.
Hartwig FP, Bowden J, Wang L, Smith GD, Davies NM. Average causal effect estimation via instrumental variables: the no simultaneous heterogeneity assumption. arXiv. 2020; Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.10017 .
Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91:444–55.
Brookhart MA, Schneeweiss S. Preference-based instrumental variable methods for the estimation of treatment effects: assessing validity and interpreting results. Int J Biostat. 2007;3:Article 14.
Wang L, Tchetgen Tchetgen E. Bounded, efficient and multiply robust estimation of average treatment effects using instrumental variables. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 2018;80:531–550.
Hardle W, Stoker TM. Investigating smooth multiple regression by the method of average derivatives. J Am Stat Assoc. 1989;84:986.
Powell JL, Stock JH, Stoker TM. Semiparametric estimation of index coefficients. Econometrica. 1989;57:1430.
Davies NM, Smith GD, Windmeijer F, Martin RM. Issues in the reporting and conduct of instrumental variable studies: a systematic review. Epidemiology. 2013;24:363–369.
Swanson SA, Hernán MA. Commentary: how to report instrumental variable analyses (suggestions welcome). Epidemiology. 2013;24:370–374.
Mills HL, Higgins JPT, Morris RW, et al. Detecting Heterogeneity of Intervention Effects Using Analysis and Meta-analysis of Differences in Variance Between Trial Arms. Epidemiology. 2021;32:846–854.
Sanderson E, Glymour MM, Holmes M v, et al. Mendelian randomization. Nat Rev Methods Primers. 2022;2:1–21.

Auteurs

Fernando Pires Hartwig (FP)

From the Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.
MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Linbo Wang (L)

Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

George Davey Smith (G)

MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Neil Martin Davies (NM)

MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
K.G. Jebsen Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Nursing, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Classifications MeSH