A Compound Model of Multiple Treatment Selection with Applications to Marginal Structural Modeling
Stein, D. W.; Gaspar, F.; Piantadosi, S.; Amin, A.; Webb, B.; Lu, D.; D'Arinzo, L.; Oliver, M.; Fitzgerald, K.
Show abstract
Methods of causal inference are used to estimate treatment effectiveness for non-randomized study designs. The propensity score (i.e., the probability that a subject receives the study treatment conditioned on a set of variables related to treatment and/or outcome) is often used with matching or sample weighting techniques to, ideally, eliminate bias in the estimates of treatment effect due to treatment decisions. If multiple treatments are available, the propensity score is a function of the adjustment set and the set of possible treatments. This paper develops a compound model that separates the treatment decision into a binary decision: treat or dont treat; and a potential treatment decision: choose the treatment that would be given if the subject is treated. It is applicable if the treatment set is finite, treatments are given at one time point, and the outcome is observed at a fixed time point. This representation can reduce bias when not all treatments are available to all patients. Multiple treatment stabilized marginal structural weights were calculated with this approach, and the method was applied to an observational study to evaluate the effectiveness of different neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to treat infection with various severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A Double Machine Learning Approach for the Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness under the Test-Negative Design: Analysis of Québec Administrative Data 97%
- Power Analysis for Stepped Wedge Trials with Two Treatments 95%
- A Stability-Enhanced Lasso Approach for Covariate Selection in Non-Linear Mixed Effect Model 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- External control arm analysis: an evaluation of propensity score approaches, G-computation, and doubly debiased machine learning 96%
- Comparison of Bayesian networks, G-estimation and linear models to estimate causal treatment effects in aggregated N-of-1 trials 94%
- Prediction-powered Inference for Clinical Trials 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Adjusting for time of infection or positive test when estimating the risk of a post-infection outcome in an epidemic 94%
- Two-Stage Multivariate Mendelian Randomization on Multiple Outcomes with Mixed Distributions 94%
- Health Utility Adjusted Survival: a Composite Endpoint for Clinical Trial Designs 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Time-to-event estimation of birth year prevalence trends: a method to enable investigating the etiology of childhood disorders including autism 94%
- A Bayesian Susceptible-Infectious-Hospitalized-Ventilated-Recovered Model to Predict Demand for COVID-19 Inpatient Care in a Large Healthcare System 93%
- A scaling approach to estimate the COVID-19 infection fatality ratio from incomplete data 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Assessing Direct and Spillover Effects of Intervention Packages in Network-Randomized Studies 94%
- Causal Estimands for Infectious Disease Count Outcomes to Investigate the Public Health Impact of Interventions 93%
- Incorporating data from multiple endpoints in the analysis of clinical trials: example from RSV vaccines 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.