Related Experiment Videos
Using Negative Control Outcomes to Detect Selection Bias in Mendelian Randomization Studies
Apostolos Gkatzionis1, George Davey Smith1,2, Kate Tilling1,2
1MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Abstract:
Mendelian randomization is currently mainly implemented through the use of genetic variants as instrumental variables to inestigate the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome of interest. Mendelian randomization studies are robust to confounding bias and reverse causation, but they remain susceptible to selection bias; for example, this can happen if the exposure or outcome are associated with selection into the study sample. Negative controls are sometimes used to detect biases (typically due to confounding) in observational studies. Here, we focus specifically on Mendelian randomization analyses and discuss under what conditions a variable can be used as a negative control outcome to detect selection mechanisms that could bias Mendelian randomization estimates. We show that the main requirement is that the negative control outcome relates to confounders of the exposure and outcome. Counter-intuitively, the effect of the negative control on selection is of secondary concern; for example, a variable that does not affect selection can be a valid negative control for an outcome that does. We also investigate under what conditions age and sex can be used as negative control outcomes in Mendelian randomization analyses. In a real-data application, we investigate the pairwise causal relationships between 19 traits, utilizing data from the UK Biobank. Treating biological sex and natural hair color as negative control outcomes, we identify selection bias in analyses involving commonly used traits such as alcohol consumption, body mass index and educational attainment.
Insights
Negative control outcomes can detect selection bias in Mendelian randomization studies. These outcomes need to relate to confounders of the exposure and outcome, not necessarily selection itself.
Area of Science:
- Epidemiology
- Genetic Epidemiology
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Mendelian randomization (MR) uses genetic variants as instrumental variables to infer causal effects.
- MR is robust to confounding and reverse causation but susceptible to selection bias.
- Negative controls are used to detect biases in observational studies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To define conditions for using negative control outcomes in MR to detect selection bias.
- To investigate the utility of age and sex as negative control outcomes in MR.
- To apply these methods to real-world data and identify selection bias in common traits.
Main Methods:
- Focused on Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses.
- Defined criteria for negative control outcomes to detect selection bias.
- Utilized UK Biobank data for a real-data application involving 19 traits.
- Employed biological sex and natural hair color as negative control outcomes.
Main Results:
- Established that negative control outcomes must relate to confounders of the exposure and outcome.
- Demonstrated that the negative control's effect on selection is secondary.
- Identified selection bias in MR analyses of alcohol consumption, BMI, and educational attainment using UK Biobank data.
- Showed that age and sex can serve as valid negative control outcomes under specific conditions.
Conclusions:
- Negative control outcomes are valuable for detecting selection bias in Mendelian randomization.
- The proposed methodology can uncover hidden biases in genetic epidemiology studies.
- Findings highlight the importance of considering selection mechanisms in MR analyses of common traits.
Related Concept Videos
Controls in Experiments
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
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, controlled...
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.
Blinding
Genetic Screens
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which result in visible changes...