Advertisement

Lifetime Data Analysis

, 16:136 | Cite as

Measurement error correction for the cumulative average model in the survival analysis of nutritional data: application to Nurses’ Health Study

  • Weiliang Qiu
  • Bernard Rosner
Article

Abstract

The use of the cumulative average model to investigate the association between disease incidence and repeated measurements of exposures in medical follow-up studies can be dated back to the 1960s (Kahn and Dawber, J Chron Dis 19:611–620, 1966). This model takes advantage of all prior data and thus should provide a statistically more powerful test of disease-exposure associations. Measurement error in covariates is common for medical follow-up studies. Many methods have been proposed to correct for measurement error. To the best of our knowledge, no methods have been proposed yet to correct for measurement error in the cumulative average model. In this article, we propose a regression calibration approach to correct relative risk estimates for measurement error. The approach is illustrated with data from the Nurses’ Health Study relating incident breast cancer between 1980 and 2002 to time-dependent measures of calorie-adjusted saturated fat intake, controlling for total caloric intake, alcohol intake, and baseline age.

Keywords

Measurement error Regression calibration Nutritional data 

Supplementary material

10985_2009_9124_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (177 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 178 kb)

References

  1. Carroll RJ, Ruppert D, Stefanski LA, Crainiceanu CM (2006) Measurement error in nonlinear models: a modern perspective, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, FLMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Crouch EA, Spiegelman D (1990) The evaluation of integrals of the form \({\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t)exp(-t^2) dt}\) : application to logistic-normal models. J Am Stat Assoc 85: 464–469MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Cupples LA, D’Agostino RB, Anderson K, Kannel WB (1988) Comparison of baseline and repeated measure covariate techniques in the Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med 7: 205–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Agostino RB, Lee M-LT, Belanger AJ, Cupples LA, Anderson K, Kannel W (1990) Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: the Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med 9: 1501–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Greenland S (1980) The effect of misclassification in the presence of covariates. Am J Epidemiol 112: 564–569Google Scholar
  6. Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, Rimm E, Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Hennekens CH, Willett WC (1997) Dietary fat intake and the risk of coronary heart disease in women. N Engl J Med 337: 1491–1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kahn HA, Dawber TR (1966) The development of coronary heart disease in relation to sequential biennial measures of cholesterol in the Framingham Study. J Chron Dis 19: 611–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim EHJ, Willett WC, Colditz GA, Hankinson SE, Stampfer MJ, Hunter DJ, Rosner B, Holmes MD (2006) Dietary fat and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in a 20-year follow-up. Am J Epidemiol 164: 990–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Li Y, Lin X (2003) Functional inference in frailty measurement error models for clustered survival data using the simex approach. J Am Stat Assoc 98: 191–203MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Prentice RL (1982) Covariate measurement errors and parameter estimation in a failure time regression model. Biometrika 69: 331–342MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Rosner BA (1996) Measurement error models for ordinal exposure variables measured with error. Stat Med 15: 293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rosner B, Willett WC, Spiegelman D (1989) Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for systematic within-person measurement error. Stat Med 8: 1051–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rosner B, Spiegelman D, Willett WC (1990) Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for measurement error: the case of multiple covariates measured with error. Am J Epidemiol 132: 734–745Google Scholar
  14. Rosner B, Michels KB, Chen Y-H, Day NE (2008) Measurement error correction for nutritional exposures with correlated measurement error: use of the method of triads in a longitudinal setting. Stat Med 27: 3466–3489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Spiegelman D, McDermott A, Rosner B (1997) Regression calibration method for correcting measurement-error bias in nutritional epidemiology. Am J Clin Nutr 65(suppl): 1179S–1186SGoogle Scholar
  16. Willett W (1998) Nutritional epidemiology, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Willett WC, Sampson L, Stampfer MJ, Rosner B, Bain C, Witschi J, Hennekens CH, Speizer FE (1985) Reproducibility and validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 122: 51–65Google Scholar
  18. Willett WC, Sampson L, Browne ML, Stampfer MJ, Rosner B, Hennekens CH, Speizer FE (1988) The use of a self-administered questionnaire to assess diet four years in the past. Am J Epidemiol 127: 188–199Google Scholar
  19. Wu M, Ware JH (1979) On the use of repeated measurements in regression analysis with dichotomous responses. Biometrics 35: 513–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Yi GY (2008) A simulation-based marginal method for longitudinal data with dropout and mismeasured covariates. Biostatistics 9: 501–512MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yi GY, He W (2006) Methods for bivariate survival data with mismeasured covariates under an accelerated failure time model. Commun Stat A Theory Methods 35: 1539–1554MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Yi GY, Lawless JF (2007) A corrected likelihood method for the proportional hazards model with covariates subject to measurement error. J Stat Plan Infer 137: 1816–1828MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Channing Laboratory, Department of MedicineBrigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations