Abstract
The goal of this study was to examine what happens to established associations between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and cortical surface and thickness regions once we apply inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) to address potential selection bias. Moreover, we illustrate how different factors that predict participation contribute to potential selection bias. Participants were 9- to 11-year-old children from the Generation R study (N = 2707). Cortical area and thickness were measured with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ADHD symptoms with the Child Behavior Checklist. We examined how associations between ADHD symptoms and brain morphology change when we weight our sample back to either follow-up (ages 9-11), baseline (cohort at birth), or eligible (population of Rotterdam at time of recruitment). Weights were derived using IPCW or raking and missing predictors of participation used to estimate weights were imputed. Weighting analyses to baseline and eligible increased beta coefficients for the middle temporal gyrus surface area, as well as fusiform gyrus cortical thickness. Alternatively, the beta coefficient for the rostral anterior cingulate decreased. Removing one group of variables used for estimating weights resulted in the weighted regression coefficient moving closer to the unweighted regression coefficient. In addition, we found considerably different beta coefficients for most surface area regions and all thickness measures when we did not impute missing covariate data. Our findings highlight the importance of using inverse probability weighting (IPW) in the neuroimaging field, especially in the context of mental health-related research. We found that including all variables related to exposure-outcome in the IPW model and combining IPW with multiple imputations can help reduce bias. We encourage future psychiatric neuroimaging studies to define their target population, collect information on eligible but not included participants and use inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) to reduce selection bias.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.