Abstract
When estimating population attributable fractions (PAF), it is common to partition a naturally continuous exposure into a categorical risk factor. While prior risk factor categorization can help estimation and interpretation, it can result in underestimation of the disease burden attributable to the exposure as well as biased comparisons across different exposures and risk factors. Here, we propose sensible PAF estimands for continuous exposures under a potential outcomes framework. In contrast to previous approaches, we incorporate estimation of the minimum risk exposure value (MREV) into our procedures. While for exposures such as tobacco usage, a sensible value of the MREV is known, often it is unknown and needs to be estimated. Second, in the setting that the MREV value is an extreme-value of the exposure lying in the distributional tail, we argue that the natural estimator of PAF may be both statistically biased and highly volatile; instead, we consider a family of modified PAFs which include the natural estimate of PAF as a limit. A graphical comparison of this set of modified PAF for differing risk factors may be a better way to rank risk factors as intervention targets, compared to the standard PAF calculation. Finally, we analyse the bias that may ensue from prior risk factor categorization, examining whether categorization is ever a good idea, and suggest interpretations of categorized-estimands within a causal inference setting.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Dr. Ferguson and Dr. Maturo received funding the HRB grant EIA-2017-017
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
HRB Ireland
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
R code for performing analyses described in the manuscript can be obtained by contacting the corresponding author
