Sensitivity analysis of selection bias: a graphical display by bias-correction index

PeerJ. 2023 Nov 16:11:e16411. doi: 10.7717/peerj.16411. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Background: In observational studies, how the magnitude of potential selection bias in a sensitivity analysis can be quantified is rarely discussed. The purpose of this study was to develop a sensitivity analysis strategy by using the bias-correction index (BCI) approach for quantifying the influence and direction of selection bias.

Methods: We used a BCI, a function of selection probabilities conditional on outcome and covariates, with different selection bias scenarios in a logistic regression setting. A bias-correction sensitivity plot was illustrated to analyze the associations between proctoscopy examination and sociodemographic variables obtained using the data from the Taiwan National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and of a subset of individuals who consented to having their health insurance data further linked.

Results: We included 15,247 people aged ≥20 years, and 87.74% of whom signed the informed consent. When the entire sample was considered, smokers were less likely to undergo proctoscopic examination (odds ratio (OR): 0.69, 95% CI [0.57-0.84]), than nonsmokers were. When the data of only the people who provided consent were considered, the OR was 0.76 (95% CI [0.62-0.94]). The bias-correction sensitivity plot indicated varying ORs under different degrees of selection bias.

Conclusions: When data are only available in a subsample of a population, a bias-correction sensitivity plot can be used to easily visualize varying ORs under different selection bias scenarios. The similar strategy can be applied to models other than logistic regression if an appropriate BCI is derived.

Keywords: Bias-correction; Health survey; Observational study; Selection bias; Sensitivity analysis.

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Informed Consent*
  • Insurance, Health*
  • Odds Ratio
  • Selection Bias
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Grants and funding

The authors received no funding for this work.