The effects of hypothetical behavioral interventions on the 13-year incidence of overweight/obesity in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: In view of the high burden of childhood overweight/obesity (OW/OB), it is important to identify targets for interventions that may have the greatest effects on preventing OW/OB in early life. Using methods of causal inference, we studied the effects of sustained behavioral interventions on the long-term risk of developing OW/OB based on a large European cohort. METHODS: Our sample comprised 10 877 children aged 2 to < 10 years at baseline who participated in the well-phenotyped IDEFICS/I.Family cohort. Children were followed from 2007/08 to 2020/21. Applying the parametric g-formula, the 13-year risk of developing OW/OB was estimated under various sustained hypothetical interventions on physical activity, screen time, dietary intake and sleep duration. Interventions imposing adherence to recommendations (e.g. maximum 2 h/day screen time) as well as interventions 'shifting' the behavior by a specified amount (e.g. decreasing screen time by 30 min/day) were compared to 'no intervention' (i.e. maintaining the usual or so-called natural behavior). Separately, the effectiveness of these interventions in vulnerable groups was assessed. RESULTS: The 13-year risk of developing OW/OB was 30.7% under no intervention and 25.4% when multiple interventions were imposed jointly. Meeting screen time and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) recommendations were found to be most effective, reducing the incidence of OW/OB by -2.2 [-4.4;-0.7] and -2.1 [-3.7;-0.8] percentage points (risk difference [95% confidence interval]), respectively. Meeting sleep recommendations (-0.6 [-1.1;-0.3]) had a similar effect as increasing sleep duration by 30 min/day (-0.6 [-0.9;-0.3]). The most effective intervention in children of parents with low/medium educational level was being member in a sports club; for children of mothers with OW/OB, meeting screen time recommendations and membership in a sports club had the largest effects. CONCLUSIONS: While the effects of single behavioral interventions sustained over 13 years were rather small, a joint intervention on multiple behaviors resulted in a relative reduction of the 13-year OW/OB risk by between 10 to 26%. Individually, meeting MVPA and screen time recommendations were most effective. Nevertheless, even under the joint intervention the absolute OW/OB risk remained at a high level of 25.4% suggesting that further strategies to better prevent OW/OB are required.

Ignorability for general longitudinal data.

Likelihood factors that can be disregarded for inference are termed ignorable. We demonstrate that close ties exist between ignorability and identification of causal effects by covariate adjustment. A graphical condition, stability, plays a role analogous to that of missingness at random, but is applicable to general longitudinal data. Our formulation of ignorability does not depend on any notion of missing data, so is appealing in situations where missing data may not actually exist. Several examples illustrate how stability may be assessed.

Simulating from marginal structural models with time-dependent confounding.

We discuss why it is not always obvious how to simulate longitudinal data from a general marginal structural model (MSM) for a survival outcome while ensuring that the data exhibit complications due to time-dependent confounding. On the basis of the relation between a directed acyclic graph and an MSM, we suggest a data-generating process that satisfies both these requirements, the general validity of which we prove. Our approach is instructive regarding the interpretation of MSMs and useful in that it allows one to examine the finite sample performance of methods that claim to adjust for time-dependent confounding. We apply our methodology to design a simulation study that emulates typical longitudinal studies such as the Swiss HIV Cohort Study so that competing methods of adjusting for time-dependent covariates can be compared.

On the choice of parameterisation and priors for the Bayesian analyses of Mendelian randomisation studies.

Mendelian randomisation is a form of instrumental variable analysis that estimates the causal effect of an intermediate phenotype or exposure on an outcome or disease in the presence of unobserved confounding, using a genetic variant as the instrument. A Bayesian approach allows current knowledge to be incorporated into the analysis in the form of informative prior distributions, and the unobserved confounder can be modelled explicitly. We consider Bayesian methods for Mendelian randomisation in the case where all relationships are linear and there are no interactions. A 'full' model in which the unobserved confounder is included explicitly is not completely identifiable, although the causal parameter can be estimated. We compare inferences from this general but non-identified model with a reduced parameter model that is identifiable. We show that, theoretically, additional information about the causal parameter can be obtained by using the non-identifiable full model, rather than the identifiable reduced model, but that this is advantageous only when realistically informative priors are used and when the instrument is weak or the sample size is small. Furthermore, we consider the impact of using 'vague' versus 'informative' priors.