Cited by 46Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Survivor bias in Mendelian randomization analysis

Vansteelandt, Stijn, Dukes, Oliver, Martinussen, Torben·2018·Biostatistics

Abstract

Mendelian randomization studies employ genotypes as experimental handles to infer the effect of genetically modified exposures (e.g. vitamin D exposure) on disease outcomes (e.g. mortality). The statistical analysis of these studies makes use of the standard instrumental variables framework. Many of these studies focus on elderly populations, thereby ignoring the problem of left truncation, which arises due to the selection of study participants being conditional upon surviving up to the time of study onset. Such selection, in general, invalidates the assumptions on which the instrumental variables analysis rests. We show that Mendelian randomization studies of adult or elderly populations will therefore, in general, return biased estimates of the exposure effect when the considered genotype affects mortality; in contrast, standard tests of the causal null hypothesis that the exposure does not affect the mortality rate remain unbiased, even when they ignore this problem of left truncation. To eliminate "survivor bias" or "truncation bias" from the effect of exposure on mortality, we next propose various simple strategies under a semi-parametric additive hazard model. We examine the performance of the proposed methods in simulation studies and use them to infer the effect of vitamin D on all-cause mortality based on the Monica10 study with the genetic variant filaggrin as instrumental variable.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biostatistics/kxx050

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Study participation is heritable and influenced by a number of different traits, and large studies such as the UK Biobank have high levels of selection in those who participate.

    “Study participation has shown to be heritable and is influenced by a number of different traits, and large studies such as the UK Biobank have been shown to have high levels of selection in those who participate.31,170–172”

    From Mendelian randomization (2022) · cites this paper as [172]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vansteelandt, S., Dukes, O., & Martinussen, T.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
Vansteelandt, Stijn
Venue
Biostatistics
Published
2017-09-27
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
426-443
ISSN
  • 1465-4644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4357
OpenAlex
W2765843292
Cited by
46
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biostatistics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Research Foundation - Flanders
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
survivorship bias, left truncation, Mendelian randomization, instrumental variables, mortality, vitamin D, filaggrin, causal inference, older adults, exposure effect estimation
MeSH terms
Filaggrin Proteins, Adult, Aged, Humans, Intermediate Filament Proteins, Middle Aged, Vitamin D, Models, Statistical, Bias, Biostatistics, Mendelian Randomization Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review