Skip to main content
Log in

From bad to worse: collider stratification amplifies confounding bias in the “obesity paradox”

  • METHODS
  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Smoking is often identified as a confounder of the obesity–mortality relationship. Selection bias can amplify the magnitude of an existing confounding bias. The objective of the present report is to demonstrate how confounding bias due to cigarette smoking is increased in the presence of collider stratification bias using an empirical example and directed acyclic graphs. The empirical example uses data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, a prospective cohort study of 15,792 men and women in the United States. Poisson regression models were used to examine the confounding effect of smoking. In the total ARIC study population, smoking produced a confounding bias of <3 percentage points. This result was obtained by comparing the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for obesity from a model adjusted for smoking was 1.07 (95 % CI 1.00, 1.15) with one that did not adjust for smoking was 1.10 (95 % CI 1.03, 1.18). However, among smokers with CVD, the obesity IRR was 0.89 (95 % CI 0.81, 0.99), while among non-smokers with CVD the obesity IRR was 1.20 (95 % CI 1.03, 1.41). The empirical and graphical explanations presented suggest that the magnitude of the confounding bias induced by smoking is greater in the presence of collider stratification bias.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  1. Glymour MM, Greenland S. Causal Diagrams. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash T, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams Wilkins; 2008. p. 183–212.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hernán MA, Hernández-Díaz S, Robins JM. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology. 2004;15(5):615–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Banack HR, Kaufman JS. The obesity paradox: understanding the effect of obesity on mortality among individuals with cardiovascular disease. Prev Med. 2014;62:96–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Preston SH, Stokes A. Obesity paradox: conditioning on disease enhances biases in estimating the mortality risks of obesity. Epidemiology. 2014;25(3):454–61.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Flanders DW, Eldridge RC, McClellan W. A nearly unavoidable mechanism for collider bias in the obesity-end-stage-renal-disease-mortality and similar studies. Epidemiology. 2014;25(5):762–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The BMI in Diverse Populations Collaborative Group. Effect of Smoking on the body mass index-mortality relation: empirical evidence from 15 studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;150(12):1297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiolero A, Faeh D, Paccaud F, Cornuz J. Consequences of smoking for body weight, body fat distribution, and insulin resistance. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87(4):801–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Durazo-Arvizu RA, Cooper RS. Issues related to modeling the body mass index-mortality association: the shape of the association and the effects of smoking status. Int J Obes. 2008;32(S3):S52–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mehio-Sibai A, Feinleib M, Sibai TA, Armenian HK. a positive or a negative confounding variable? A simple teaching aid for clinicians and students. Ann Epidemiol. 2005;15(6):421–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. VanderWeele TJ, Robins JM. Signed directed acyclic graphs for causal inference. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 2010;72(1):111–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. de Gonzalez Berrington, et al. Body-mass index and mortality among 1.46 million white adults. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(23):2211–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hailey R. Banack.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Banack, H.R., Kaufman, J.S. From bad to worse: collider stratification amplifies confounding bias in the “obesity paradox”. Eur J Epidemiol 30, 1111–1114 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-015-0069-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-015-0069-7

Keywords

Navigation