Original Article| Volume 61, ISSUE 3, P247-255, March 2008

A sensitivity analysis using information about measured confounders yielded improved uncertainty assessments for unmeasured confounding



      In the analysis of observational data, the argument is sometimes made that if adjustment for measured confounders induces little change in the treatment–outcome association, then there is less concern about the extent to which the association is driven by unmeasured confounding. We quantify this reasoning using Bayesian sensitivity analysis (BSA) for unmeasured confounding. Using hierarchical models, the confounding effect of a binary unmeasured variable is modeled as arising from the same distribution as that of measured confounders. Our objective is to investigate the performance of the method compared to sensitivity analysis, which assumes that there is no relationship between measured and unmeasured confounders.

      Study Design and Setting

      We apply the method in an observational study of the effectiveness of beta-blocker therapy in heart failure patients.


      BSA for unmeasured confounding using hierarchical prior distributions yields an odds ratio (OR) of 0.72, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.56, 0.93 for the association between beta-blockers and mortality, whereas using independent priors yields OR=0.72, 95% CrI: 0.45, 1.15.


      If the confounding effect of a binary unmeasured variable is similar to that of measured confounders, then conventional sensitivity analysis may give results that overstate the uncertainty about bias.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Schneeweiss S.
        Sensitivity analysis and external adjustment for unmeasured confounders in epidemiologic database studies of therapeutics.
        Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2006; 15: 291-303
        • Greenland S.
        Multiple bias modelling for analysis of observational data.
        J R Stat Soc Ser A. 2005; 168 ([with discussion]): 267-306
        • Greenland S.
        The impact of prior distributions for uncontrolled confounding and response bias: a case study of the relation of wire codes and magnetic fields to childhood leukemia.
        J Am Stat Assoc. 2003; 98: 47-54
        • McCandless L.C.
        • Gustafson P.
        • Levy A.R.
        Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.
        Stat Med. 2007; 26: 2331-2347
        • Joffe M.M.
        Confounding by indication: the case of calcium channel blockers.
        Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2000; 9: 37-41
        • Walker A.M.
        Confounding by indication.
        Epidemiology. 1996; 7: 335-336
        • Walker A.M.
        • Stampfer M.J.
        Observational studies of drug safety.
        Lancet. 1996; 348: 489
        • Glynn R.J.
        • Knight E.L.
        • Levin R.
        • Avorn J.
        Paradoxical relations of drug treatment with mortality in older persons.
        Epidemiology. 2001; 12: 682-689
        • Psaty B.M.
        • Koepsell T.D.
        • Lin D.Y.
        • Weiss N.S.
        • Siscovick D.S.
        • Rosendaal F.R.
        • et al.
        Assessment and control for confounding by indication in observational studies.
        J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999; 47: 749-754
        • Chamberlayne R.
        • Green B.
        • Barer M.L.
        • Hertzman C.
        • Lawrence W.J.
        • Sheps S.B.
        Creating a population-based linked health database: a new resource for health services research.
        Can J Public Health. 1998; 89: 270-273
        • Zhou Z.
        • Rahme E.
        • Abrahamowicz M.
        • Pilote L.
        Survival bias associated with time-to-treatment initiation in drug effectiveness evaluation: a comparison of methods.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2005; 162: 1016-1023
        • Polanczyk C.A.
        • Rohde L.E.
        • Philbin E.A.
        • Di-Salvo T.G.
        A new casemix adjustment index for hospital mortality among patients with congestive heart failure.
        Med Care. 1998; 36: 1489-1499
        • Sin D.D.
        • McAlister F.A.
        The effect of beta-blockers on morbidity and mortality in a population-based cohort of 11,942 elderly patients with heart failure.
        Am J Med. 2002; 113: 650-656
        • Lee D.S.
        • Tu J.V.
        • Juurlink D.N.
        • Alter D.A.
        • Ko D.T.
        • Austin P.C.
        • et al.
        Risk-treatment mismatch in the pharmacotherapy of heart failure.
        J Am Med Assoc. 2005; 294: 1240-1247
        • Domanski M.J.
        • Krause-Steinrauf H.
        • Massie B.M.
        • Deedwania P.
        • Follmann D.
        • Kovar D.
        • et al.
        • for the BEST Investigators
        A comparative analysis of the results from 4 trials of beta-blocker therapy for heart failure: BEST, CIBIS-II, MERIT-HF, and COPERNICUS.
        J Card Fail. 2003; 9: 354-363
        • Rubin D.B.
        Practical implications of modes of statistical inference for causal effects and the critical role of the assignment mechanism.
        Biometrics. 1991; 47: 1213-1234
        • Greenland S.
        Principles of multilevel modelling.
        Int J Epidemiol. 2000; 29: 158-167
        • Gelman A.
        • Carlin J.B.
        • Stern H.S.
        • Rubin D.B.
        Bayesian data analysis.
        2nd edition. Chapman Hall/CRC, New York2004
        • Hernán M.A.
        • Hernández-Diaz S.
        • Werler M.M.
        • Mitchell A.A.
        Causal knowledge as a prerequisite for confounding evaluation: an application to birth defects epidemiology.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2002; 155: 176-184
        • Greenland S.
        • Maclure M.
        • Schlesselman J.J.
        • Poole C.
        • Morgenstern H.
        Standardized regression coefficients: a further critique and review of some alternatives.
        Epidemiology. 1991; 2: 387-392
        • R Development Core Team
        R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
        3-900051-00-3 R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna2004 (Available at) (Accessed April 1, 2007)