IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0194608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial

Author

Listed:
  • Rick J Jansen
  • Bruce H Alexander
  • Richard B Hayes
  • Anthony B Miller
  • Sholom Wacholder
  • Timothy R Church

Abstract

When some individuals are screen-detected before the beginning of the study, but otherwise would have been diagnosed symptomatically during the study, this results in different case-ascertainment probabilities among screened and unscreened participants, referred to here as lead-time-biased case-ascertainment (LTBCA). In fact, this issue can arise even in risk-factor studies nested within a randomized screening trial; even though the screening intervention is randomly allocated to trial arms, there is no randomization to potential risk-factors and uptake of screening can differ by risk-factor strata. Under the assumptions that neither screening nor the risk factor affects underlying incidence and no other forms of bias operate, we simulate and compare the underlying cumulative incidence and that observed in the study due to LTBCA. The example used will be constructed from the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian cancer screening trial. The derived mathematical model is applied to simulating two nested studies to evaluate the potential for screening bias in observational lung cancer studies. Because of differential screening under plausible assumptions about preclinical incidence and duration, the simulations presented here show that LTBCA due to chest x-ray screening can significantly increase the estimated risk of lung cancer due to smoking by 1% and 50%. Traditional adjustment methods cannot account for this bias, as the influence screening has on observational study estimates involves events outside of the study observation window (enrollment and follow-up) that change eligibility for potential participants, thus biasing case ascertainment.

Suggested Citation

  • Rick J Jansen & Bruce H Alexander & Richard B Hayes & Anthony B Miller & Sholom Wacholder & Timothy R Church, 2018. "A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0194608
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194608
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194608&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0194608?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
    ---><---

    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:plo:pone00:0194608. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.