Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 26, 2025

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Can statistical adjustment guided by causal inference improve the accuracy of effect estimation? A simulation and
Ruohua Yan1, Tianyi Liu1,2, Yaguang Peng1
1Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine, Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children's Health, Nanlishilu 56, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100045, China.
Background:
Statistical adjustment is often considered to control confounding bias in observational studies, especially case-control studies. However, different adjustment strategies may affect the estimation of odds ratios (ORs), and in turn affect the results of their pooled analyses. Our study is aimed to investigate how to deal with the statistical adjustment in case-control studies to improve the validity of meta-analyses.
Methods:
Three types of adjustment strategies were evaluated including insufficient adjustment (not all preset confounders were adjusted), full adjustment (all confounders were adjusted under the guidance of causal inference), and improper adjustment (covariates other than confounders were adjusted). We carried out a series of Monte Carlo simulation experiments based on predesigned scenarios, and assessed the accuracy of effect estimations from meta-analyses of case-control studies by combining ORs calculated according to different adjustment strategies. Then we used the data from an empirical review to illustrate the replicability of the simulation results.
Results:
For all scenarios with different strength of causal relations, combining ORs that were comprehensively adjusted for confounders would get the most precise effect estimation. By contrast, combining ORs that were not sufficiently adjusted for confounders or improperly adjusted for mediators or colliders would easily introduce bias in causal interpretation, especially when the true effect of exposure on outcome was weak or none. The findings of the simulation experiments were further verified by the empirical research.
Conclusions:
Statistical adjustment guided by causal inference are recommended for effect estimation. Therefore, when conducting meta-analyses of case-control studies, the causal relationship formulated by exposure, outcome, and covariates should be firstly understood through a directed acyclic graph, and then reasonable original ORs could be extracted and combined by suitable methods.
More Related Videos
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
10:26Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
Published on: September 11, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Causality in Epidemiology
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups