Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates
Authors: Lee, PH 
Burstyn, I
Keywords: Causal effect
Issue Date: 2016
Publisher: BioMed Central
Source: BMC medical research methodology, 2016, v. 16, 54, p. 1-18 How to cite?
Journal: BMC medical research methodology 
Abstract: Background: Common methods for confounder identification such as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), hypothesis testing, or a 10 % change-in-estimate (CIE) criterion for estimated associations may not be applicable due to (a) insufficient knowledge to draw a DAG and (b) when adjustment for a true confounder produces less than 10 % change in observed estimate (e.g. in presence of measurement error).
Methods: We compare previously proposed simulation-based approach for confounder identification that can be tailored to each specific study and contrast it with commonly applied methods (significance criteria with cutoff levels of p-values of 0.05 or 0.20, and CIE criterion with a cutoff of 10 %), as well as newly proposed two-stage procedure aimed at reduction of false positives (specifically, risk factors that are not confounders). The new procedure first evaluates potential for confounding by examination of correlation of covariates and applies simulated CIE criteria only if there is evidence of correlation, while rejecting a covariate as confounder otherwise. These approaches are compared in simulations studies with binary, continuous, and survival outcomes. We illustrate the application of our proposed confounder identification strategy in examining the association of exposure to mercury in relation to depression in the presence of suspected confounding by fish intake using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009-2010 data.
Results: Our simulations showed that the simulation-determined cutoff was very sensitive to measurement error in exposure and potential confounder. The analysis of NHANES data demonstrated that if the noise-to-signal ratio (error variance in confounder/variance of confounder) is at or below 0.5, roughly 80 % of the simulated analyses adjusting for fish consumption would correctly result in a null association of mercury and depression, and only an extremely poorly measured confounder is not useful to adjust for in this setting.
Conclusions: No a prior criterion developed for a specific application is guaranteed to be suitable for confounder identification in general. The customization of model-building strategies and study designs through simulations that consider the likely imperfections in the data, as well as finite-sample behavior, would constitute an important improvement on some of the currently prevailing practices in confounder identification and evaluation.
EISSN: 1471-2288
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0159-6
Rights: © 2016 Lee and Burstyn. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
The following publication Lee, P. H., & Burstyn, I. (2016). Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16, 54, 1-18 is available at
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Lee_Identification_Confounder_Epidemiologic.pdf2.66 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show full item record
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Contents


Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Apr 4, 2019


Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Apr 4, 2019

Page view(s)

Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Oct 16, 2019


Citations as of Oct 16, 2019

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.