Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity

Gareth J Griffith(University of Bristol), Tim Morris(University of Bristol), Matthew Tudball(University of Bristol), Annie Herbert(University of Bristol), Giulia Mancano(University of Bristol), Lindsey Pike(University of Bristol), Gemma C. Sharp(University of Bristol), Jonathan A C Sterne(University of Bristol), Tom Palmer(University of Bristol), George Davey Smith(University of Bristol), Kate Tilling(University of Bristol), Luisa Zuccolo(University of Bristol), Neil M Davies(Norwegian University of Science and Technology), Gibran Hemani(Bristol City Council)
Nature Communications
November 12, 2020
Cited by 906Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Numerous observational studies have attempted to identify risk factors for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 disease outcomes. Studies have used datasets sampled from patients admitted to hospital, people tested for active infection, or people who volunteered to participate. Here, we highlight the challenge of interpreting observational evidence from such non-representative samples. Collider bias can induce associations between two or more variables which affect the likelihood of an individual being sampled, distorting associations between these variables in the sample. Analysing UK Biobank data, compared to the wider cohort the participants tested for COVID-19 were highly selected for a range of genetic, behavioural, cardiovascular, demographic, and anthropometric traits. We discuss the mechanisms inducing these problems, and approaches that could help mitigate them. While collider bias should be explored in existing studies, the optimal way to mitigate the problem is to use appropriate sampling strategies at the study design stage.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis