Wenze Tang | Searcharxiv

arXiv2024

Causal Covariate Selection for the Imputation-based Regression Calibration Method for Exposure Measurement Error Bias Correction

In this paper, we identify the criteria for the selection of the minimal and most efficient covariate adjustment sets for the regression calibration method developed by Carroll, Rupert and Stefanski (CRS, 1992), used to correct bias due to continuous exposure measurement error. We utilize directed acyclic graphs to illustrate how subject matter knowledge can aid in the selection of such adjustment sets. Valid measurement error correction requires the collection of data on any (1) common causes of true exposure and outcome and (2) common causes of measurement error and outcome, in both the main study and validation study. For the CRS regression calibration method to be valid, researchers need to minimally adjust for covariate set (1) in both the measurement error model (MEM) and the outcome model and adjust for covariate set (2) at least in the MEM. In practice, we recommend including the minimal covariate adjustment set in both the MEM and the outcome model. In contrast with the regression calibration method developed by Rosner, Spiegelman and Willet, it is valid and more efficient to adjust for correlates of the true exposure or of measurement error that are not risk factors in the MEM only under CRS method. We applied the proposed covariate selection approach to the Health Professional Follow-up Study, examining the effect of fiber intake on cardiovascular incidence. In this study, we demonstrated potential issues with a data-driven approach to building the MEM that is agnostic to the structural assumptions. We extend the originally proposed estimators to settings where effect modification by a covariate is allowed. Finally, we caution against the use of the regression calibration method to calibrate the true nutrition intake using biomarkers.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2022

Causal Selection of Covariates in Regression Calibration for Mismeasured Continuous Exposure

Regression calibration as developed by Rosner, Spiegelman and Willet is used to correct the bias in effect estimates due to measurement error in continuous exposures. The method involves two models: a measurement error model (MEM) relating the mismeasured exposure to the true exposure and an outcome model relating the mismeasured exposure to outcome. However, no comprehensive guidance exists for determining which covariates should be included in each model. In this paper, we investigate the selection of the minimal and most efficient covariate adjustment sets under a causal inference framework. We show that in order to correct for the measurement error, researchers must adjust for, in both MEM and outcome model, any common causes (1) of true exposure and the outcome and (2) of measurement error and the outcome. When such variable(s) are only available in the main study, researchers should still adjust for them in the outcome model to reduce bias, provided that these covariates are at most weakly associated with measurement error. We also show that adjusting for so called prognostic variables that are independent of true exposure and measurement error in outcome model, may increase efficiency, while adjusting for any covariates that are associated only with true exposure generally results in efficiency loss in realistic settings. We apply the proposed covariate selection approach to the Health Professional Follow-up Study dataset to study the effect of fiber intake on cardiovascular disease. Finally, we extend the originally proposed estimators to a non-parametric setting where effect modification by covariates is allowed.

stat.ME↗