MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408540877 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaf173

Quantifying Potential Immortal Time Bias in Observational Studies in Acute Severe Infection

2025· article· en· W4408540877 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Yates, Tom Parks, Peter J. Dodd

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Immortal time bias is a spurious or exaggerated protective association that commonly arises in naive analyses of observational data. It occurs when people receive the intervention because they survive, rather than survive because they received the intervention. Studies in conditions with substantial early mortality, such as acute severe infections, are particularly vulnerable. Methods: We developed IMMORTOOL, an R package accessible via a user-friendly web interface (https://petedodd.github.io/IMMORTOOL-live/). This tool will estimate the potential for immortal time bias using empiric or assumed data on the distributions of time to intervention and time to event. Assumptions are that no other biases are present and that the intervention does not affect the outcome. The tool was benchmarked using studies presenting both naive analyses and analyses with the intervention fit as a time-varying exposure. We applied IMMORTOOL to a set of influential observational studies that used naive analyses when estimating the impact of polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) on survival in streptococcal toxic shock syndrome (STSS). Results: IMMORTOOL demonstrated that published estimates suggesting a survival advantage from giving IVIG in STSS are explained, at least in part, by immortal time bias. Conclusions: IMMORTOOL can quantify the potential for immortal time bias in observational analyses. Importantly, it simulates only bias resulting from misallocation of person-time, not other related selection biases. The tool may help readers interrogate published studies. We do not advocate IMMORTOOL being used to justify naive analyses where robust analyses are possible. To what extent giving IVIG in STSS improves survival remains uncertain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.300
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207