Literature DB >> 31388990

Randomization inference with general interference and censoring.

Wen Wei Loh1, Michael G Hudgens2, John D Clemens3, Mohammad Ali4, Michael E Emch5.   

Abstract

Interference occurs between individuals when the treatment (or exposure) of one individual affects the outcome of another individual. Previous work on causal inference methods in the presence of interference has focused on the setting where it is a priori assumed that there is "partial interference," in the sense that individuals can be partitioned into groups wherein there is no interference between individuals in different groups. Bowers et al. (2012, Political Anal, 21, 97-124) and Bowers et al. (2016, Political Anal, 24, 395-403) consider randomization-based inferential methods that allow for more general interference structures in the context of randomized experiments. In this paper, extensions of Bowers et al. that allow for failure time outcomes subject to right censoring are proposed. Permitting right-censored outcomes is challenging because standard randomization-based tests of the null hypothesis of no treatment effect assume that whether an individual is censored does not depend on treatment. The proposed extension of Bowers et al. to allow for censoring entails adapting the method of Wang et al. (2010, Biostatistics, 11, 676-692) for two-sample survival comparisons in the presence of unequal censoring. The methods are examined via simulation studies and utilized to assess the effects of cholera vaccination in an individually randomized trial of 73 000 children and women in Matlab, Bangladesh.
© 2019 The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  causal inference; censoring; interference; permutation test; randomization inference; spillover effects

Year:  2019        PMID: 31388990      PMCID: PMC7004887          DOI: 10.1111/biom.13125

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


  8 in total

1.  Testing and interval estimation for two-sample survival comparisons with small sample sizes and unequal censoring.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Stephen W Lagakos; Robert J Gray
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-05-02       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Toward Causal Inference With Interference.

Authors:  Michael G Hudgens; M Elizabeth Halloran
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  Herd immunity conferred by killed oral cholera vaccines in Bangladesh: a reanalysis.

Authors:  Mohammad Ali; Michael Emch; Lorenz von Seidlein; Mohammad Yunus; David A Sack; Malla Rao; Jan Holmgren; John D Clemens
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Jul 2-8       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Assessing effects of cholera vaccination in the presence of interference.

Authors:  Carolina Perez-Heydrich; Michael G Hudgens; M Elizabeth Halloran; John D Clemens; Mohammad Ali; Michael E Emch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Dependent Happenings: A Recent Methodological Review.

Authors:  M Elizabeth Halloran; Michael G Hudgens
Journal:  Curr Epidemiol Rep       Date:  2016-07-28

6.  Spatial and environmental connectivity analysis in a cholera vaccine trial.

Authors:  Michael Emch; Mohammad Ali; Elisabeth D Root; Mohammad Yunus
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Field trial of oral cholera vaccines in Bangladesh: results of one year of follow-up.

Authors:  J D Clemens; J R Harris; D A Sack; J Chakraborty; F Ahmed; B F Stanton; M U Khan; B A Kay; N Huda; M R Khan
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 5.226

8.  The role of vaccine coverage within social networks in cholera vaccine efficacy.

Authors:  Elisabeth D Root; Sophia Giebultowicz; Mohammad Ali; Mohammad Yunus; Michael Emch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  Assessing intervention effects in a randomized trial within a social network.

Authors:  Shaina J Alexandria; Michael G Hudgens; Allison E Aiello
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-11-26       Impact factor: 1.701

2.  Inverse probability weighted estimators of vaccine effects accommodating partial interference and censoring.

Authors:  Sujatro Chakladar; Samuel Rosin; Michael G Hudgens; M Elizabeth Halloran; John D Clemens; Mohammad Ali; Michael E Emch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 1.701

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.