From: Assessing the effectiveness of empirical calibration under different bias scenarios
Difference Coverage | Difference in Mean of Standardised Absolute Bias | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | Ideal—Suitable negative controls | Random— Suitable negative controls | Random—Unsuitable negative controls | Ideal—Suitable negative controls | Random—Suitable negative controls | Random—Unsuitable negative controls |
No calibration vs default empirical calibration | ||||||
 Unmeasured confounder | 0.48 | 0.60 | 0.05 | −0.46 | −0.23 | 0.00 |
 Model misspecification Quadratic term | 0.24 | 0.27 | 0.08 | −0.05 | 0.03 | −0.01 |
 Model misspecification Interaction term | −0.09 | 0.04 | 0.02 | −0.19 | −0.09 | − 0.02 |
 Non-positivity | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | −0.02 | 0.07 | −0.01 |
 Measurement error | 0.01 | 0.01 | NA | −0.02 | −0.02 | NA |
Default empirical calibration vs empirical calibration with the NULL systematic error model | ||||||
 Unmeasured confounder | 0.09 | −0.06 | −0.04 | 0.55 | −1.56 | 0.00 |
 Model misspecification Quadratic term | −0.09 | −0.13 | − 0.08 | 0.20 | 0.35 | 0.02 |
 Model misspecification Interaction term | −0.52 | −0.06 | − 0.03 | 0.29 | 0.00 | 0.01 |
 Non-positivity | −0.02 | −0.01 | − 0.03 | −0.01 | 0.09 | −0.01 |
 Measurement error | −0.04 | −0.02 | NA | 0.02 | 0.01 | NA |
Default empirical calibration (5 negative controls) vs empirical calibration with 30 negative controls | ||||||
 Unmeasured confounder | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.85 | −8.31 | −0.36 |
 Model misspecification Quadratic term | 0.00 | 0.00 | −0.05 | 0.04 | −0.11 | 0.08 |
 Model misspecification Interaction term | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.06 | −0.60 |
 Non-positivity | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.00 | −0.02 | 0.43 | 0.12 |
 Measurement error | 0.01 | −0.01 | NA | −0.11 | −0.06 | NA |