Cited by 214Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Assumptions of IV Methods for Observational Epidemiology.

Open access
Didelez, Vanessa, Meng, Sha, Sheehan, Nuala A.·2010·Statistical Science

Abstract

Instrumental variable (IV) methods are becoming increasingly popular as they seem to offer the only viable way to overcome the problem of unobserved confounding in observational studies. However, some attention has to be paid to the details, as not all such methods target the same causal parameters and some rely on more restrictive parametric assumptions than others. We therefore discuss and contrast the most common IV approaches with relevance to typical applications in observational epidemiology. Further, we illustrate and compare the asymptotic bias of these IV estimators when underlying assumptions are violated in a numerical study. One of our conclusions is that all IV methods encounter problems in the presence of effect modification by unobserved confounders. Since this can never be ruled out for sure, we recommend that practical applications of IV estimators be accompanied routinely by a sensitivity analysis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1214/09-sts316

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Assortative mating can lead to genetic associations that represent social differences rather than causal effects.

    “Assortative mating occurs when individuals reproduce with people who are more similar to themselves than would be expected by chance. This can also lead to genetic associations that represent social differences rather than causal effects 50 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.
  2. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.
  3. GENELETTI, S. and DAWID, A. P. (2010). The effect of treat- ment on the treated: A decision theoretic perspective. In Ca- suality in the Sciences (M. Illari, F. Russo and J. Williamson, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK. To appear.
  4. MULLAHY, J. (1997). Instrumental variable estimation of count data models: Application to models of cigarette smok- ing behaviour. Review of Economics and Statistics 79 586- 593.
  5. PEARL, J. (2000). Causality. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam- bridge. MR1744773
  6. ROBINS, J. (1989). The analysis of randomized and non- randomized AIDS treatment trials using a new approach to causal inference in longitudinal studies. In Health Service Re- search Methodology. A Focus on AIDS (L. Sechrest, H. Free- man and A. Mulley, eds.) 113-159.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Didelez, V., Meng, S., & Sheehan, N. A.
Affiliations
University of Leicester (GB)
Corresponding author
Didelez, Vanessa
Venue
Statistical Science
Published
2010-02-01
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
22-40
ISSN
  • 0883-4237 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-8745
OpenAlex
W2949540592
Cited by
214
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 18
FWCI
11.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Statistical Science (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Project Euclid (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
instrumental variables, unmeasured confounding, causal inference, effect modification, asymptotic bias, sensitivity analysis, parametric assumptions, observational studies, causal parameters

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