Amir Almasi-Hashiani
1, Saharnaz Nedjat
1,2, Mohammad Ali Mansournia
1*1 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Knowledge Utilization Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
*Corresponding Author: *Corresponding Author: Mohammad Ali Mansournia, MD, MPH, PhD; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, P. O. Box: 14155-6446, Tehran, Iran. Email: , Email:
mansournia_ma@yahoo.com
Abstract
The goal of many observational studies is to estimate the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome after adjustment for confounders,
but there are still some serious errors in adjusting confounders in clinical journals. Standard regression modeling (e.g., ordinary
logistic regression) fails to estimate the average effect of exposure in total population in the presence of interaction between
exposure and covariates, and also cannot adjust for time-varying confounding appropriately. Moreover, stepwise algorithms of the
selection of confounders based on P values may miss important confounders and lead to bias in effect estimates. Causal methods
overcome these limitations. We illustrate three causal methods including inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting (IPTW) and
parametric g-formula, with an emphasis on a clever combination of these 2 methods: targeted maximum likelihood estimation
(TMLE) which enjoys a double-robust property against bias.