Efficient odds ratio estimation under two-phase sampling using error-prone data from a multi-national HIV research cohort

Association analysis of self-reported outcomes with a validated subset

In health-science research, outcomes ascertained through surveys and interviews are subject to potential bias with respect to the true outcome status, which is only ascertainable with clinical and laboratory assessment. This measurement error may lead to biased inference when evaluating associations between exposures and outcomes of interest. Here, we consider a cohort study in which the outcome of interest is ascertained via questionnaire, subject to imperfect ascertainment, but where a subset of participants also have a clinically assessed, validated outcome available. This presents a methodological opportunity to address potential bias. Specifically, we constructed the likelihood in two parts, one using the validated subset and the other using a subset without validation. This work expands on that proposed by Pepe and enables inference with standard statistical software. Weighted generalized linear model estimates for our method and maximum likelihood estimates (MLE) for Pepe's method were computed, and the statistical inference was based on the standard large-sample likelihood theory. We compare the finite sample performance of two approaches through Monte Carlo simulations. This methodological work was motivated by a large cohort study of long-term childhood cancer survivors, allowing us to provide a relevant application example where we examined the association between clinical factors and chronic health conditions.

Errors in multiple variables in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cohort and electronic health record data: statistical challenges and opportunities

Objectives: Observational data derived from patient electronic health records (EHR) data are increasingly used for human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) research. There are challenges to using these data, in particular with regards to data quality; some are recognized, some unrecognized, and some recognized but ignored. There are great opportunities for the statistical community to improve inference by incorporating validation subsampling into analyses of EHR data.Methods: Methods to address measurement error, misclassification, and missing data are relevant, as are sampling designs such as two-phase sampling. However, many of the existing statistical methods for measurement error, for example, only address relatively simple settings, whereas the errors seen in these datasets span multiple variables (both predictors and outcomes), are correlated, and even affect who is included in the study.Results/Conclusion: We will discuss some preliminary methods in this area with a particular focus on time-to-event outcomes and outline areas of future research.