Alternative sensitivity analyses for regression estimates of treatment effects to unobserved confounding in binary and survival data

Byeong Yeob Choi (), Jason P. Fine, Roman Fernandez and M. Alan Brookhart
Additional contact information
Byeong Yeob Choi: University of Texas Health San Antonio
Jason P. Fine: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Roman Fernandez: University of Texas Health San Antonio
M. Alan Brookhart: Duke University

Statistical Methods & Applications, 2022, vol. 31, issue 3, No 8, 637-659

Abstract: Abstract Estimates of treatment effects in non-experimental studies are subject to bias owing to unobserved confounding. It is desirable to assess the sensitivity of an estimated treatment effect to a hypothetical unmeasured confounder, U. A commonly used approach to sensitivity analysis requires two parameters: one parameter relates U to the treatment and the other relates it to the outcome. The method uses a simple algebraic formula with these two parameters to relate the true treatment effect to the apparent treatment effect, obtained from a reduced model without U. This formula approximately holds for logistic and proportional hazards models, which are frequently used to model binary and survival outcomes. This approximation works with an assumption that the absolute regression coefficient for the unmeasured confounder is small. Therefore, when the unmeasured confounding is relatively large, the formula will not perform well. In this article, we propose alternative sensitivity analysis methods for binary and survival outcomes. We develop sensitivity analysis formulas for treatment effect estimates under probit and additive hazard models, which are alternatives to the logistic and proportional hazards models, respectively. The proposed formulae hold without any approximations. We also discuss a method to postulate reasonable values of the sensitivity parameters using the observed covariates. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed formulae perform well for moderate and severe unmeasured confounding even when the model used for the sensitivity analysis is moderately mis-specified. The practical utility of the approach is illustrated in two example studies.

Keywords: Additive hazard model; Treatment effect; Probit regression; Sensitivity analysis; Unmeasured confounding (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10260-021-00597-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:stmapp:v:31:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10260-021-00597-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10260/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10260-021-00597-z

Access Statistics for this article

Statistical Methods & Applications is currently edited by Tommaso Proietti

More articles in Statistical Methods & Applications from Springer, Società Italiana di Statistica
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().