In the absence of a randomized experiment, a key assumption for drawing causal inference about treatment effects is the ignorable treatment assignment. Violations of the ignorability assumption may lead to biased treatment effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis helps gauge how causal conclusions will be altered in response to the potential magnitude of departure from the ignorability assumption. However, sensitivity analysis approaches for unmeasured confounding in the context of multiple treatments and binary outcomes are scarce. We propose a flexible Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis approach for causal inference in such settings. We first derive the general form of the bias introduced by unmeasured confounding, with emphasis on theoretical properties uniquely relevant to multiple treatments. We then propose methods to encode the impact of unmeasured confounding on potential outcomes and adjust the estimates of causal effects in which the presumed unmeasured confounding is removed. Our proposed methods embed nested multiple imputation within the Bayesian framework, which allow for seamless integration of the uncertainty about the values of the sensitivity parameters and the sampling variability, as well as use of the Bayesian Additive Regression Trees for modeling flexibility. Expansive simulations validate our methods and gain insight into sensitivity analysis with multiple treatments. We use the SEER-Medicare data to demonstrate sensitivity analysis using three treatments for early stage non-small cell lung cancer. The methods developed in this work are readily available in the R package SAMTx.
相關內容
Decision-making often requires accurate estimation of treatment effects from observational data. This is challenging as outcomes of alternative decisions are not observed and have to be estimated. Previous methods estimate outcomes based on unconfoundedness but neglect any constraints that unconfoundedness imposes on the outcomes. In this paper, we propose a novel regularization framework for estimating average treatment effects that exploits unconfoundedness. To this end, we formalize unconfoundedness as an orthogonality constraint, which ensures that the outcomes are orthogonal to the treatment assignment. This orthogonality constraint is then included in the loss function via a regularization. Based on our regularization framework, we develop deep orthogonal networks for unconfounded treatments (DONUT), which learn outcomes that are orthogonal to the treatment assignment. Using a variety of benchmark datasets for estimating average treatment effects, we demonstrate that DONUT outperforms the state-of-the-art substantially.
Causal inference for extreme events has many potential applications in fields such as medicine, climate science and finance. We study the extremal quantile treatment effect of a binary treatment on a continuous, heavy-tailed outcome. Existing methods are limited to the case where the quantile of interest is within the range of the observations. For applications in risk assessment, however, the most relevant cases relate to extremal quantiles that go beyond the data range. We introduce an estimator of the extremal quantile treatment effect that relies on asymptotic tail approximations and uses a new causal Hill estimator for the extreme value indices of potential outcome distributions. We establish asymptotic normality of the estimators even in the setting of extremal quantiles, and we propose a consistent variance estimator to achieve valid statistical inference. In simulation studies we illustrate the advantages of our methodology over competitors, and we apply it to a real data set.
Synthetic control methods are commonly used to estimate the treatment effect on a single treated unit in panel data settings. A synthetic control (SC) is a weighted average of control units built to match the treated unit's pre-treatment outcome trajectory, with weights typically estimated by regressing pre-treatment outcomes of the treated unit to those of the control units. However, it has been established that such regression estimators can fail to be consistent. In this paper, we introduce a proximal causal inference framework to formalize identification and inference for both the SC weights and the treatment effect on the treated. We show that control units previously perceived as unusable can be repurposed to consistently estimate the SC weights. We also propose to view the difference in the post-treatment outcomes between the treated unit and the SC as a time series, which opens the door to a rich literature on time-series analysis for treatment effect estimation. We further extend the traditional linear model to accommodate general nonlinear models allowing for binary and count outcomes which are understudied in the SC literature. We illustrate our proposed methods with simulation studies and an application to evaluation of the 1990 German Reunification.
Researchers are often interested in learning not only the effect of treatments on outcomes, but also the pathways through which these effects operate. A mediator is a variable that is affected by treatment and subsequently affects outcome. Existing methods for penalized mediation analyses either assume that finite-dimensional linear models are sufficient to remove confounding bias, or perform no confounding control at all. In practice, these assumptions may not hold. We propose a method that considers the confounding functions as nuisance parameters to be estimated using data-adaptive methods. We then use a novel regularization method applied to this objective function to identify a set of important mediators. We derive the asymptotic properties of our estimator and establish the oracle property under certain assumptions. Asymptotic results are also presented in a local setting which contrast the proposal with the standard adaptive lasso. We also propose a perturbation bootstrap technique to provide asymptotically valid post-selection inference for the mediated effects of interest. The performance of these methods will be discussed and demonstrated through simulation studies.
This paper proposes a confidence interval construction for heterogeneous treatment effects in the context of multi-stage experiments with $N$ samples and high-dimensional, $d$, confounders. Our focus is on the case of $d\gg N$, but the results obtained also apply to low-dimensional cases. We showcase that the bias of regularized estimation, unavoidable in high-dimensional covariate spaces, is mitigated with a simple double-robust score. In this way, no additional bias removal is necessary, and we obtain root-$N$ inference results while allowing multi-stage interdependency of the treatments and covariates. Memoryless property is also not assumed; treatment can possibly depend on all previous treatment assignments and all previous multi-stage confounders. Our results rely on certain sparsity assumptions of the underlying dependencies. We discover new product rate conditions necessary for robust inference with dynamic treatments.
This review systematizes the emerging literature for causal inference using deep neural networks under the potential outcomes framework. It provides an intuitive introduction on how deep learning can be used to estimate/predict heterogeneous treatment effects and extend causal inference to settings where confounding is non-linear, time varying, or encoded in text, networks, and images. To maximize accessibility, we also introduce prerequisite concepts from causal inference and deep learning. The survey differs from other treatments of deep learning and causal inference in its sharp focus on observational causal estimation, its extended exposition of key algorithms, and its detailed tutorials for implementing, training, and selecting among deep estimators in Tensorflow 2 available at github.com/kochbj/Deep-Learning-for-Causal-Inference.
Machine learning has successfully framed many sequential decision making problems as either supervised prediction, or optimal decision-making policy identification via reinforcement learning. In data-constrained offline settings, both approaches may fail as they assume fully optimal behavior or rely on exploring alternatives that may not exist. We introduce an inherently different approach that identifies possible ``dead-ends'' of a state space. We focus on the condition of patients in the intensive care unit, where a ``medical dead-end'' indicates that a patient will expire, regardless of all potential future treatment sequences. We postulate ``treatment security'' as avoiding treatments with probability proportional to their chance of leading to dead-ends, present a formal proof, and frame discovery as an RL problem. We then train three independent deep neural models for automated state construction, dead-end discovery and confirmation. Our empirical results discover that dead-ends exist in real clinical data among septic patients, and further reveal gaps between secure treatments and those that were administered.
We propose a framework for estimation and inference when the model may be misspecified. We rely on a local asymptotic approach where the degree of misspecification is indexed by the sample size. We construct estimators whose mean squared error is minimax in a neighborhood of the reference model, based on one-step adjustments. In addition, we provide confidence intervals that contain the true parameter under local misspecification. As a tool to interpret the degree of misspecification, we map it to the local power of a specification test of the reference model. Our approach allows for systematic sensitivity analysis when the parameter of interest may be partially or irregularly identified. As illustrations, we study three applications: an empirical analysis of the impact of conditional cash transfers in Mexico where misspecification stems from the presence of stigma effects of the program, a cross-sectional binary choice model where the error distribution is misspecified, and a dynamic panel data binary choice model where the number of time periods is small and the distribution of individual effects is misspecified.
We develop a post-selective Bayesian framework to jointly and consistently estimate parameters in group-sparse linear regression models. After selection with the Group LASSO (or generalized variants such as the overlapping, sparse, or standardized Group LASSO), uncertainty estimates for the selected parameters are unreliable in the absence of adjustments for selection bias. Existing post-selective approaches are limited to uncertainty estimation for (i) real-valued projections onto very specific selected subspaces for the group-sparse problem, (ii) selection events categorized broadly as polyhedral events that are expressible as linear inequalities in the data variables. Our Bayesian methods address these gaps by deriving a likelihood adjustment factor, and an approximation thereof, that eliminates bias from selection. Paying a very nominal price for this adjustment, experiments on simulated data, and data from the Human Connectome Project demonstrate the efficacy of our methods for a joint estimation of group-sparse parameters and their uncertainties post selection.
We show how to apply Sobol's method of global sensitivity analysis to measure the influence exerted by a set of nodes' evidence on a quantity of interest expressed by a Bayesian network. Our method exploits the network structure so as to transform the problem of Sobol index estimation into that of marginalization inference. This way, we can efficiently compute indices for networks where brute-force or Monte Carlo based estimators for variance-based sensitivity analysis would require millions of costly samples. Moreover, our method gives exact results when exact inference is used, and also supports the case of correlated inputs. The proposed algorithm is inspired by the field of tensor networks, and generalizes earlier tensor sensitivity techniques from the acyclic to the cyclic case. We demonstrate the method on three medium to large Bayesian networks that cover the areas of project risk management and reliability engineering.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191