Cited by 88Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Negative Control Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies

Smith, George Davey·2012·Epidemiology

Abstract

To the Editor: In their excellent review on negative controls,1 Lipsitch and colleagues1 state they “are not aware of an example of the use of a negative control exposure to detect confounding” in an epidemiologic setting. One such explicit application of this approach relates to the use of paternal exposures as a negative control exposure for maternal exposures considered to have an intrauterine influence on offspring outcomes.2 Paternal smoking, as a negative control, may show associations with offspring outcomes similar to those of maternal smoking if the associations are generated by shared familial confounding factors or by parental genotypes transmitted to the offspring. If, however, there is an intrauterine influence, then only the maternal exposure would be expected to show an independent association with the outcome. Figure 1 demonstrates that the effect of maternal smoking during pregnancy on offspring birthweight is considerably greater than that of paternal smoking during pregnancy, and mutual adjustment (to take account of associative mating by smoking) attenuates the paternal effect to zero. This is in line with the considerable body of evidence that maternal smoking has a causal effect on offspring birthweight. There has been enthusiasm for the proposition that fetal exposure to maternal smoking leads to increased obesity in offspring.3 Although maternal smoking during pregnancy does indeed demonstrate the expected association, the strength of association with paternal smoking during pregnancy is similar before and after mutual adjustment (Fig. 2).4 This casts doubt on the causal nature of the association between intrauterine exposure to maternal smoking and offspring adiposity.Figure 1: Effect of maternal and paternal smoking on offspring birthweight (difference in birthweight between offspring of smokers and nonsmokers in grams).Figure 2: Effect of maternal and paternal smoking during pregnancy on offspring body mass index (difference in body mass index between offspring of smokers and nonsmokers in kg/m2).As Lipsitch and colleagues1 argue, the use of negative controls could be usefully expanded in epidemiology. If associations are found with such controls, this does not invalidate the observation under interrogation but does encourage further intense scrutiny of potential biases and confounding that may underlie what is seen. George Davey Smith MRC Centre for Causal Analyses in Translational Epidemiology University of Bristol Bristol, United Kingdom [email protected]

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ede.0b013e318245912c

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • In negative control studies, an unbiased negative control study is expected to be null and the real study not-null if there is a true causal effect and the assumptions of the approach are met.

    “In a third approach–negative control studies–we would expect an unbiased negative control study to be null and the ‘real’ study not-null if there is a true causal effect and the assumptions of this approach are met (see Table 1).39,40”

    From Triangulation in aetiological epidemiology (2017) · cites this paper as [40]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, G. D.
Affiliations
University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Smith, George Davey
Venue
Epidemiology
Published
2012-03
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
350-351
ISSN
1044-3983 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026534761
Cited by
88
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
paternal smoking, maternal smoking, prenatal exposure, offspring adiposity, mutual adaptation, causal inference, body mass index
MeSH terms
Humans, Bias, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Observation

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