IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v11y2020i1d10.1038_s41467-020-19478-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Gareth J. Griffith

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Tim T. Morris

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Matthew J. Tudball

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Annie Herbert

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Giulia Mancano

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Lindsey Pike

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Gemma C. Sharp

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Jonathan Sterne

    (University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Tom M. Palmer

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • George Davey Smith

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Kate Tilling

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Luisa Zuccolo

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

  • Neil M. Davies

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove
    NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology)

  • Gibran Hemani

    (University of Bristol
    University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Gareth J. Griffith & Tim T. Morris & Matthew J. Tudball & Annie Herbert & Giulia Mancano & Lindsey Pike & Gemma C. Sharp & Jonathan Sterne & Tom M. Palmer & George Davey Smith & Kate Tilling & Luisa Z, 2020. "Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-19478-2
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-19478-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19478-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-020-19478-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ivan Berlin & Daniel Thomas, 2020. "Does Smoking Protect against Being Hospitalized for COVID-19?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-2, December.
    2. Gianmarco Mignogna & Caitlin E. Carey & Robbee Wedow & Nikolas Baya & Mattia Cordioli & Nicola Pirastu & Rino Bellocco & Kathryn Fiuza Malerbi & Michel G. Nivard & Benjamin M. Neale & Raymond K. Walte, 2023. "Patterns of item nonresponse behaviour to survey questionnaires are systematic and associated with genetic loci," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(8), pages 1371-1387, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-19478-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.