Sample size and power calculations in Mendelian randomization with a single instrumental variable and a binary outcome

被引:435
作者
Burgess, Stephen [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Mendelian randomization; sample size; power; binary outcome; allele score; CAUSAL ODDS RATIO; WEAK INSTRUMENTS; BIAS;
D O I
10.1093/ije/dyu005
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Sample size calculations are an important tool for planning epidemiological studies. Large sample sizes are often required in Mendelian randomization investigations. Methods and results: Resources are provided for investigators to perform sample size and power calculations for Mendelian randomization with a binary outcome. We initially provide formulae for the continuous outcome case, and then analogous formulae for the binary outcome case. The formulae are valid for a single instrumental variable, which may be a single genetic variant or an allele score comprising multiple variants. Graphs are provided to give the required sample size for 80% power for given values of the causal effect of the risk factor on the outcome and of the squared correlation between the risk factor and instrumental variable. R code and an online calculator tool are made available for calculating the sample size needed for a chosen power level given these parameters, as well as the power given the chosen sample size and these parameters. Conclusions: The sample size required for a given power of Mendelian randomization investigation depends greatly on the proportion of variance in the risk factor explained by the instrumental variable. The inclusion of multiple variants into an allele score to explain more of the variance in the risk factor will improve power, however care must be taken not to introduce bias by the inclusion of invalid variants.
引用
收藏
页码:922 / 929
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2011, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2001, Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data
  • [3] Buonaccorsi J, 2005, ENCY BIOSTATISTICS
  • [4] Burgess S., Online Sample Size and Power Calculator for Mendelian Randomization with a Binary Outcome
  • [5] Identifying the odds ratio estimated by a two-stage instrumental variable analysis with a logistic regression model
    Burgess, Stephen
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2013, 32 (27) : 4726 - 4747
  • [6] Use of allele scores as instrumental variables for Mendelian randomization
    Burgess, Stephen
    Thompson, Simon G.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 42 (04) : 1134 - 1144
  • [7] Use of Mendelian randomisation to assess potential benefit of clinical intervention
    Burgess, Stephen
    Butterworth, Adam
    Malarstig, Anders
    Thompson, Simon G.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2012, 345
  • [8] Improving bias and coverage in instrumental variable analysis with weak instruments for continuous and binary outcomes
    Burgess, Stephen
    Thompson, Simon G.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 31 (15) : 1582 - 1600
  • [9] Missing Data Methods in Mendelian Randomization Studies With Multiple Instruments
    Burgess, Stephen
    Seaman, Shaun
    Lawlor, Debbie A.
    Casas, Juan P.
    Thompson, Simon G.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 174 (09) : 1069 - 1076
  • [10] Avoiding bias from weak instruments in Mendelian randomization studies
    Burgess, Stephen
    Thompson, Simon G.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 40 (03) : 755 - 764