Literature DB >> 21969992

Targeted maximum likelihood based causal inference: Part I.

Mark J van der Laan1.   

Abstract

Given causal graph assumptions, intervention-specific counterfactual distributions of the data can be defined by the so called G-computation formula, which is obtained by carrying out these interventions on the likelihood of the data factorized according to the causal graph. The obtained G-computation formula represents the counterfactual distribution the data would have had if this intervention would have been enforced on the system generating the data. A causal effect of interest can now be defined as some difference between these counterfactual distributions indexed by different interventions. For example, the interventions can represent static treatment regimens or individualized treatment rules that assign treatment in response to time-dependent covariates, and the causal effects could be defined in terms of features of the mean of the treatment-regimen specific counterfactual outcome of interest as a function of the corresponding treatment regimens. Such features could be defined nonparametrically in terms of so called (nonparametric) marginal structural models for static or individualized treatment rules, whose parameters can be thought of as (smooth) summary measures of differences between the treatment regimen specific counterfactual distributions. In this article, we develop a particular targeted maximum likelihood estimator of causal effects of multiple time point interventions. This involves the use of loss-based super-learning to obtain an initial estimate of the unknown factors of the G-computation formula, and subsequently, applying a target-parameter specific optimal fluctuation function (least favorable parametric submodel) to each estimated factor, estimating the fluctuation parameter(s) with maximum likelihood estimation, and iterating this updating step of the initial factor till convergence. This iterative targeted maximum likelihood updating step makes the resulting estimator of the causal effect double robust in the sense that it is consistent if either the initial estimator is consistent, or the estimator of the optimal fluctuation function is consistent. The optimal fluctuation function is correctly specified if the conditional distributions of the nodes in the causal graph one intervenes upon are correctly specified. The latter conditional distributions often comprise the so called treatment and censoring mechanism. Selection among different targeted maximum likelihood estimators (e.g., indexed by different initial estimators) can be based on loss-based cross-validation such as likelihood based cross-validation or cross-validation based on another appropriate loss function for the distribution of the data. Some specific loss functions are mentioned in this article. Subsequently, a variety of interesting observations about this targeted maximum likelihood estimation procedure are made. This article provides the basis for the subsequent companion Part II-article in which concrete demonstrations for the implementation of the targeted MLE in complex causal effect estimation problems are provided.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21969992

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Biostat        ISSN: 1557-4679            Impact factor:   0.968


  36 in total

1.  Improved double-robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.

Authors:  Andrea Rotnitzky; Quanhong Lei; Mariela Sued; James M Robins
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2012-04-29       Impact factor: 2.445

2.  Targeted maximum likelihood estimation of the parameter of a marginal structural model.

Authors:  Michael Rosenblum; Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 0.968

3.  Implementation of G-computation on a simulated data set: demonstration of a causal inference technique.

Authors:  Jonathan M Snowden; Sherri Rose; Kathleen M Mortimer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Effect Estimation in Point-Exposure Studies with Binary Outcomes and High-Dimensional Covariate Data - A Comparison of Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting.

Authors:  Menglan Pang; Tibor Schuster; Kristian B Filion; Mireille E Schnitzer; Maria Eberg; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 0.968

5.  Causal Inference for a Population of Causally Connected Units.

Authors:  Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  J Causal Inference       Date:  2014-03

6.  Doubly robust estimation and causal inference in longitudinal studies with dropout and truncation by death.

Authors:  Michelle Shardell; Gregory E Hicks; Luigi Ferrucci
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2014-07-04       Impact factor: 5.899

7.  Discussion of Evaluation of Viable Dynamic Treatment Regimes in a Sequentially Randomized Trial of Advanced Prostate Cancer, by Wang et al. 2012.

Authors:  Paul Chaffee; Mark van der Laan
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 5.033

8.  Modeling the impact of hepatitis C viral clearance on end-stage liver disease in an HIV co-infected cohort with targeted maximum likelihood estimation.

Authors:  Mireille E Schnitzer; Erica E M Moodie; Mark J van der Laan; Robert W Platt; Marina B Klein
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Targeted maximum likelihood estimation for prediction calibration.

Authors:  Jordan Brooks; Mark J van der Laan; Alan S Go
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 0.968

10.  Application of two machine learning algorithms to genetic association studies in the presence of covariates.

Authors:  Bareng A S Nonyane; Andrea S Foulkes
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2008-11-14       Impact factor: 2.797

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.