Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userOutcome model free causal inference with ultra-high dimensional covariates
95
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Linbo Wang
Publication date
2020
fields
Mathematical Statistics
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Causal inference has been increasingly reliant on observational studies with rich covariate information. To build tractable causal models, including the propensity score models, it is imperative to first extract important features from high dimensional data. Unlike the familiar task of variable selection for prediction modeling, our feature selection procedure aims to control for confounding while maintaining efficiency in the resulting causal effect estimate. Previous empirical studies imply that one should aim to include all predictors of the outcome, rather than the treatment, in the propensity score model. In this paper, we formalize this intuition through rigorous proofs, and propose the causal ball screening for selecting these variables from modern ultra-high dimensional data sets. A distinctive feature of our proposal is that we do not require any modeling on the outcome regression, thus providing robustness against misspecification of the functional form or violation of smoothness conditions. Our theoretical analyses show that the proposed procedure enjoys a number of oracle properties including model selection consistency, normality and efficiency. Synthetic and real data analyses show that our proposal performs favorably with existing methods in a range of realistic settings.
rate research
Read More
The purpose of this paper is to construct confidence intervals for the regression coefficients in the Fine-Gray model for competing risks data with random censoring, where the number of covariates can be larger than the sample size. Despite strong motivation from biomedical applications, a high-dimensional Fine-Gray model has attracted relatively little attention among the methodological or theoretical literature. We fill in this gap by developing confidence intervals based on a one-step bias-correction for a regularized estimation. We develop a theoretical framework for the partial likelihood, which does not have independent and identically distributed entries and therefore presents many technical challenges. We also study the approximation error from the weighting scheme under random censoring for competing risks and establish new concentration results for time-dependent processes. In addition to the theoretical results and algorithms, we present extensive numerical experiments and an application to a study of non-cancer mortality among prostate cancer patients using the linked Medicare-SEER data.
Instrumental variable methods are widely used for inferring the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome when the observed relationship is potentially affected by unmeasured confounders. Existing instrumental variable methods for nonlinear outcome models require stringent identifiability conditions. We develop a robust causal inference framework for nonlinear outcome models, which relaxes the conventional identifiability conditions. We adopt a flexible semi-parametric potential outcome model and propose new identifiability conditions for identifying the model parameters and causal effects. We devise a novel three-step inference procedure for the conditional average treatment effect and establish the asymptotic normality of the proposed point estimator. We construct confidence intervals for the causal effect by the bootstrap method. The proposed method is demonstrated in a large set of simulation studies and is applied to study the causal effects of lipid levels on whether the glucose level is normal or high over a mice dataset.
Although the exposure can be randomly assigned in studies of mediation effects, any form of direct intervention on the mediator is often infeasible. As a result, unmeasured mediator-outcome confounding can seldom be ruled out. We propose semiparametric identification of natural direct and indirect effects in the presence of unmeasured mediator-outcome confounding by leveraging heteroskedasticity restrictions on the observed data law. For inference, we develop semiparametric estimators that remain consistent under partial misspecifications of the observed data model. We illustrate the proposed estimators through both simulations and an application to evaluate the effect of self-efficacy on fatigue among health care workers during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Though Gaussian graphical models have been widely used in many scientific fields, limited progress has been made to link graph structures to external covariates because of substantial challenges in theory and computation. We propose a Gaussian graphical regression model, which regresses both the mean and the precision matrix of a Gaussian graphical model on covariates. In the context of co-expression quantitative trait locus (QTL) studies, our framework facilitates estimation of both population- and subject-level gene regulatory networks, and detection of how subject-level networks vary with genetic variants and clinical conditions. Our framework accommodates high dimensional responses and covariates, and encourages covariate effects on both the mean and the precision matrix to be sparse. In particular for the precision matrix, we stipulate simultaneous sparsity, i.e., group sparsity and element-wise sparsity, on effective covariates and their effects on network edges, respectively. We establish variable selection consistency first under the case with known mean parameters and then a more challenging case with unknown means depending on external covariates, and show in both cases that the convergence rate of the estimated precision parameters is faster than that obtained by lasso or group lasso, a desirable property for the sparse group lasso estimation. The utility and efficacy of our proposed method is demonstrated through simulation studies and an application to a co-expression QTL study with brain cancer patients.
The goal of causal inference is to understand the outcome of alternative courses of action. However, all causal inference requires assumptions. Such assumptions can be more influential than in typical tasks for probabilistic modeling, and testing those assumptions is important to assess the validity of causal inference. We develop model criticism for Bayesian causal inference, building on the idea of posterior predictive checks to assess model fit. Our approach involves decomposing the problem, separately criticizing the model of treatment assignments and the model of outcomes. Conditioned on the assumption of unconfoundedness---that the treatments are assigned independently of the potential outcomes---we show how to check any additional modeling assumption. Our approach provides a foundation for diagnosing model-based causal inferences.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
