Abstract
The UK Biobank is a national prospective study of half a million participants between the ages of 40 and 69 at the time of recruitment between 2006 and 2010, established to facilitate research on diseases of aging. The imaging cohort is a subset of UK Biobank participants who have agreed to undergo extensive additional imaging assessments. However, Fry et al. (2017) finds evidence of “healthy volunteer bias” in the UK Biobank – participants are less likely to smoke, be obese, consume alcohol daily than the target population of UK adults. Here we examine selection bias in the UK Biobank imaging cohort. We address two common misconceptions: first, that study size can compensate for bias in data collection, and second that selection bias does not affect estimates of associations, which are the primary interest of the UK Biobank. We introduce inverse probability weighting (IPW) as an approach commonly used in survey research that can be used to address selection bias in volunteer health studies like the UK Biobank. We discuss 6 such methods – five existing and one novel –, assess relative performance in simulation studies, and apply them to the UK Biobank imaging cohort. We find that our novel method, BART for predicting the probability of selection combined with raking, performs well relative to existing methods, and helps alleviate selection bias in the UK Biobank imaging cohort.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
VB is funded by the University of Oxford's Clarendon Fund and the EPSRC and MRC through the OxWaSP CDT programme (EP/L016710/1). This research has been conducted in part using the UK Biobank, and analysis was carried out at the Oxford Biomedical Research Computing (BMRC) facility. BMRC is a joint development between the Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics and the Big Data Institute, supported by Health Data Research UK and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.
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:
Human subjects: UK Biobank has approval from the North West Multi-centre Research Ethics Committee (MREC) to obtain and disseminate data and samples from the participants (http://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/ethics/), and these ethical regulations cover the work in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
Footnotes
↵* thomas.nichols{at}bdi.ox.ac.uk
Updating author name and affiliations
