Literature DB >> 25663743

Nonparametric Bounds and Sensitivity Analysis of Treatment Effects.

Amy Richardson1, Michael G Hudgens2, Peter B Gilbert3, Jason P Fine4.   

Abstract

This paper considers conducting inference about the effect of a treatment (or exposure) on an outcome of interest. In the ideal setting where treatment is assigned randomly, under certain assumptions the treatment effect is identifiable from the observable data and inference is straightforward. However, in other settings such as observational studies or randomized trials with noncompliance, the treatment effect is no longer identifiable without relying on untestable assumptions. Nonetheless, the observable data often do provide some information about the effect of treatment, that is, the parameter of interest is partially identifiable. Two approaches are often employed in this setting: (i) bounds are derived for the treatment effect under minimal assumptions, or (ii) additional untestable assumptions are invoked that render the treatment effect identifiable and then sensitivity analysis is conducted to assess how inference about the treatment effect changes as the untestable assumptions are varied. Approaches (i) and (ii) are considered in various settings, including assessing principal strata effects, direct and indirect effects and effects of time-varying exposures. Methods for drawing formal inference about partially identified parameters are also discussed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Causal inference; nonparametric bounds; partially identifiable models; sensitivity analysis

Year:  2014        PMID: 25663743      PMCID: PMC4317325          DOI: 10.1214/14-STS499

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Sci        ISSN: 0883-4237            Impact factor:   2.901


  35 in total

1.  Sensitivity analyses for unmeasured confounding assuming a marginal structural model for repeated measures.

Authors:  Babette A Brumback; Miguel A Hernán; Sebastien J P A Haneuse; James M Robins
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Principal stratification and attribution prohibition: good ideas taken too far.

Authors:  Marshall Joffe
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 0.968

3.  Bayesian inference for partially identified models.

Authors:  Paul Gustafson
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.

Authors:  Lawrence C McCandless; Paul Gustafson; Adrian Levy
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-05-20       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies.

Authors:  D Y Lin; B M Psaty; R A Kronmal
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 6.  Principal stratification--a goal or a tool?

Authors:  Judea Pearl
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 0.968

7.  Is there a direct effect of pre-eclampsia on cerebral palsy not through preterm birth?

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Sonia Hernández-Diaz
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 3.980

8.  Confounding of indirect effects: a sensitivity analysis exploring the range of bias due to a cause common to both the mediator and the outcome.

Authors:  Danella M Hafeman
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders.

Authors:  Tyler J Vanderweele; Onyebuchi A Arah
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.822

10.  Controlled direct and mediated effects: definition, identification and bounds.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Scand Stat Theory Appl       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.396

View more
  5 in total

1.  Comment.

Authors:  Michael G Hudgens
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2016-01-15       Impact factor: 5.033

2.  Post-randomization Biomarker Effect Modification Analysis in an HIV Vaccine Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Bryan S Blette; Bryan E Shepherd; Michael G Hudgens
Journal:  J Causal Inference       Date:  2020-07-25

3.  In Pursuit of Evidence in Air Pollution Epidemiology: The Role of Causally Driven Data Science.

Authors:  Marco Carone; Francesca Dominici; Lianne Sheppard
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Epidemiology, genetic epidemiology and Mendelian randomisation: more need than ever to attend to detail.

Authors:  Nuala A Sheehan; Vanessa Didelez
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 5.  Clarifying the causes of consistent and inconsistent findings in genetics.

Authors:  Saloni Dattani; David M Howard; Cathryn M Lewis; Pak C Sham
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 2.344

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.