How should we study the indirect effects of antimicrobial treatment strategies? A causal perspective.
Gago, J. E.; Boyer, C.; Lipsitch, M.
Show abstract
Effective antimicrobial stewardship requires unbiased assessment of the benefits and harms of different treatment strategies, considering both immediate patient outcomes and patterns of antimicrobial resistance. In principle, these benefits and harms can be expressed as causal contrasts between treatment strategies and therefore should be ideally suited for study under the potential outcomes framework. However, causal inference in this setting is complicated by interference between individuals (or units) due to the indirect effects of antibiotic treatment, including the spread of resistant bacteria to others. These indirect effects complicate the assessment of trade-offs as benefits are mostly due to the direct effects among those treated, while harms are more diffuse and therefore harder to measure. While causal frameworks and study designs that accommodate interference have previously been proposed, they have been applied predominately to the study of vaccines, which differ from antimicrobial interventions in fundamental ways. In this article, we review these existing approaches and propose alternative adaptations tailored to the study of antimicrobial treatment strategies.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Causal Estimands for Infectious Disease Count Outcomes to Investigate the Public Health Impact of Interventions 94%
- Assessing Direct and Spillover Effects of Intervention Packages in Network-Randomized Studies 94%
- Incorporating data from multiple endpoints in the analysis of clinical trials: example from RSV vaccines 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Leveraging infectious disease models to interpret randomized controlled trials: controlling enteric pathogen transmission through water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions 96%
- Optimizing testing for COVID-19 in India 94%
- Estimation of introduction and transmission rates of SARS-CoV-2 in a prospective household study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Potential Test-Negative Design Study Bias in Outbreak Settings: Application to Ebola vaccination in Democratic Republic of Congo 93%
- Pathway-specific population attributable fractions 92%
- Causes of Outcome Learning: A causal inference-inspired machine learning approach to disentangling common combinations of potential causes of a health outcome 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.