Avoiding selection bias in metabolomics studies: a tutorial.

S C Boone, S le Cessie, K Willems van Dijk, R de Mutsert, D O Mook-Kanamori
{"title":"Avoiding selection bias in metabolomics studies: a tutorial.","authors":"S C Boone,&nbsp;S le Cessie,&nbsp;K Willems van Dijk,&nbsp;R de Mutsert,&nbsp;D O Mook-Kanamori","doi":"10.1007/s11306-018-1463-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metabolomics techniques are increasingly applied in epidemiologic research. Many available assays are still relatively expensive and therefore measurements are often performed in small patient population studies such as case series or case-control designs with strong participant selection criteria. Subsequently, metabolomics data are frequently used to assess secondary associations for which the original study was not explicitly designed. Especially in these secondary analyses, there is a risk that the original selection criteria and the conditioning that takes place due to this selection are not properly accounted for which can lead to selection bias.</p><p><strong>Aim of review: </strong>In this tutorial, we start with a brief theoretical introduction on the issue of selection bias. Subsequently, we demonstrate how selection bias can occur in metabolomics studies by means of an investigation into associations of metabolites with total body fat in a nested case-control study that was originally designed to study effects of elevated fasting glucose.</p><p><strong>Key scientific concepts of review: </strong>We demonstrate that standard analytical methods, such as stratification or adjustment in regression analyses, are not suited to deal with selection bias and may even induce the bias when analysing metabolite-phenotype relationships in selected groups. Finally, we show that inverse probability weighting, also known as survey weighting, can be used in some situations to make unbiased estimates of the outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":144887,"journal":{"name":"Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society","volume":" ","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11306-018-1463-4","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11306-018-1463-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: Metabolomics techniques are increasingly applied in epidemiologic research. Many available assays are still relatively expensive and therefore measurements are often performed in small patient population studies such as case series or case-control designs with strong participant selection criteria. Subsequently, metabolomics data are frequently used to assess secondary associations for which the original study was not explicitly designed. Especially in these secondary analyses, there is a risk that the original selection criteria and the conditioning that takes place due to this selection are not properly accounted for which can lead to selection bias.

Aim of review: In this tutorial, we start with a brief theoretical introduction on the issue of selection bias. Subsequently, we demonstrate how selection bias can occur in metabolomics studies by means of an investigation into associations of metabolites with total body fat in a nested case-control study that was originally designed to study effects of elevated fasting glucose.

Key scientific concepts of review: We demonstrate that standard analytical methods, such as stratification or adjustment in regression analyses, are not suited to deal with selection bias and may even induce the bias when analysing metabolite-phenotype relationships in selected groups. Finally, we show that inverse probability weighting, also known as survey weighting, can be used in some situations to make unbiased estimates of the outcomes.

避免代谢组学研究中的选择偏差:教程。
背景:代谢组学技术在流行病学研究中的应用越来越广泛。许多可用的分析仍然相对昂贵,因此测量通常在小型患者群体研究中进行,例如病例系列或病例对照设计,具有严格的参与者选择标准。随后,代谢组学数据经常用于评估原始研究未明确设计的次要关联。特别是在这些二次分析中,存在一种风险,即最初的选择标准和由于这种选择而发生的条件作用没有得到适当的解释,这可能导致选择偏差。复习目的:在本教程中,我们首先简要介绍了选择偏差问题的理论。随后,我们通过一项巢式病例对照研究(最初设计用于研究空腹血糖升高的影响),对代谢物与体脂的关系进行了调查,证明了选择偏差是如何在代谢组学研究中发生的。综述的关键科学概念:我们证明了标准分析方法,如回归分析中的分层或调整,不适合处理选择偏倚,甚至可能在分析选定群体的代谢物-表型关系时引起偏倚。最后,我们证明了逆概率加权,也称为调查加权,可以在某些情况下用于对结果进行无偏估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信