Marginal structural models might overcome confounding when analyzing multiple treatment effects in observational studies

2008 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 525-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Suarez ◽  
Josep Maria Haro ◽  
Diego Novick ◽  
Susana Ochoa
2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Gerhard ◽  
Joseph AC Delaney ◽  
Rhonda M Cooper-DeHoff ◽  
Jonathan Shuster ◽  
Babette A Brumback ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Lorena Lúcia Costa Ladeira ◽  
Sarah Pereira Martins ◽  
Cayara Mattos Costa ◽  
Elizabeth Lima Costa ◽  
Rubenice Amaral da Silva ◽  
...  

Biometrika ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Dukes ◽  
Stijn Vansteelandt

Summary Eliminating the effect of confounding in observational studies typically involves fitting a model for an outcome adjusted for covariates. When, as often, these covariates are high-dimensional, this necessitates the use of sparse estimators, such as the lasso, or other regularization approaches. Naïve use of such estimators yields confidence intervals for the conditional treatment effect parameter that are not uniformly valid. Moreover, as the number of covariates grows with the sample size, correctly specifying a model for the outcome is nontrivial. In this article we deal with both of these concerns simultaneously, obtaining confidence intervals for conditional treatment effects that are uniformly valid, regardless of whether the outcome model is correct. This is done by incorporating an additional model for the treatment selection mechanism. When both models are correctly specified, we can weaken the standard conditions on model sparsity. Our procedure extends to multivariate treatment effect parameters and complex longitudinal settings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document