Abstract
AbstractSelecting an appropriate set of confounders for which to control is critical for reliable causal inference. Recent theoretical and methodological developments have helped clarify a number of principles of confounder selection. When complete knowledge of a causal diagram relating all covariates to each other is available, graphical rules can be used to make decisions about covariate control. Unfortunately, such complete knowledge is often unavailable. This paper puts forward a practical approach to confounder selection decisions when the somewhat less stringent assumption is made that knowledge is available for each covariate whether it is a cause of the exposure, and whether it is a cause of the outcome. Based on recent theoretically justified developments in the causal inference literature, the following proposal is made for covariate control decisions: control for each covariate that is a cause of the exposure, or of the outcome, or of both; exclude from this set any variable known to be an instrumental variable; and include as a covariate any proxy for an unmeasured variable that is a common cause of both the exposure and the outcome. Various principles of confounder selection are then further related to statistical covariate selection methods.
Funder
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference57 articles.
1. Pearl J. Causal diagrams for empirical research (with discussion). Biometrika. 1995;82:669–710.
2. Pearl J. Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
3. Huang Y, Valtorta M. Pearl’s calculus of interventions is complete. In: Twenty second conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence.
4. Shpitser I, VanderWeele TJ, Robins JM. On the validity of covariate adjustment for estimating causal effects. In: Proceedings of the 26th conference on uncertainty and artificial intelligence. Corvallis: AUAI Press; (2010), p. 527–536.
5. Greenland S. Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias. Epidemiology. 2003;14:300–6.
Cited by
719 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献