Literature DB >> 1637973

Estimating exposure effects by modelling the expectation of exposure conditional on confounders.

J M Robins1, S D Mark, W K Newey.   

Abstract

In order to estimate the causal effects of one or more exposures or treatments on an outcome of interest, one has to account for the effect of "confounding factors" which both covary with the exposures or treatments and are independent predictors of the outcome. In this paper we present regression methods which, in contrast to standard methods, adjust for the confounding effect of multiple continuous or discrete covariates by modelling the conditional expectation of the exposures or treatments given the confounders. In the special case of a univariate dichotomous exposure or treatment, this conditional expectation is identical to what Rosenbaum and Rubin have called the propensity score. They have also proposed methods to estimate causal effects by modelling the propensity score. Our methods generalize those of Rosenbaum and Rubin in several ways. First, our approach straightforwardly allows for multivariate exposures or treatments, each of which may be continuous, ordinal, or discrete. Second, even in the case of a single dichotomous exposure, our approach does not require subclassification or matching on the propensity score so that the potential for "residual confounding," i.e., bias, due to incomplete matching is avoided. Third, our approach allows a rather general formalization of the idea that it is better to use the "estimated propensity score" than the true propensity score even when the true score is known. The additional power of our approach derives from the fact that we assume the causal effects of the exposures or treatments can be described by the parametric component of a semiparametric regression model. To illustrate our methods, we reanalyze the effect of current cigarette smoking on the level of forced expiratory volume in one second in a cohort of 2,713 adult white males. We compare the results with those obtained using standard methods.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1637973

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  62 in total

1.  Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Stuart
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 2.901

2.  Variable selection for propensity score models.

Authors:  M Alan Brookhart; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Kenneth J Rothman; Robert J Glynn; Jerry Avorn; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Privacy-maintaining propensity score-based pooling of multiple databases applied to a study of biologics.

Authors:  Jeremy A Rassen; Daniel H Solomon; Jeffrey R Curtis; Lisa Herrinton; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 4.  The use of propensity score methods in psychiatric research.

Authors:  Tyler VanderWeele
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.035

5.  Repeated measures semiparametric regression using targeted maximum likelihood methodology with application to transcription factor activity discovery.

Authors:  Catherine Tuglus; Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2011-01-06

6.  Semiparametric estimation of treatment effects given base-line covariates on an outcome measured after a post-randomization event occurs.

Authors:  Yannis Jemiai; Andrea Rotnitzky; Bryan E Shepherd; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 4.488

7.  Parsing the effects of individual SNPs in candidate genes with family data.

Authors:  Thomas J Hoffmann; Christoph Lange; Stijn Vansteelandt; Benjamin A Raby; Dawn L DeMeo; Edwin K Silverman; Scott T Weiss; Nan M Laird
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 0.444

8.  An analytic method for randomized trials with informative censoring: Part II.

Authors:  J M Robins
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.588

Review 9.  Propensity score methods to control for confounding in observational cohort studies: a statistical primer and application to endoscopy research.

Authors:  Jeff Y Yang; Michael Webster-Clark; Jennifer L Lund; Robert S Sandler; Evan S Dellon; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Identifiability, exchangeability and confounding revisited.

Authors:  Sander Greenland; James M Robins
Journal:  Epidemiol Perspect Innov       Date:  2009-09-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.