Using Inverse Probability Weighting Estimators to Evaluate Various Propensity Scores When Treatment Switching Exists

In this paper, we conduct a Monte Carlo simulation study to evaluate three propensity score (PS) scenarios for estimating an average treatment effect (ATE) in observational studies when treatment switching exists: (a) ignoring treatment switching in subjects (UPS), (b) removing subjects with treatment switching (RPS), and (c) adjusting for treatment switching effect (APS) with two inverse probability weighting estimators, IPW1 and IPW2. We evaluate these six estimators in terms of bias, mean squared error (MSE), empirical standard error (ESE), and coverage probability (CP) under various simulation scenarios. Simulation results show that the IPW2 estimator with RPS has relatively good performance.     

A comparison of balancing scores for estimating rate ratios of count data in observational studies

In this article, we conduct a Monte Carlo study to examine four balancing scores (BS1: propensity score, BS2: prognostic score, BS3: adjusted propensity score estimated by the estimated prognostic score, and BS4: adjusted propensity score estimated by the estimated prognostic score and other covariates) for adjusting bias in estimating the marginal and the conditional rate ratios of count data in observational studies. Simulation results show that BS1–BS4 are not much different in terms of estimating the marginal and the conditional rate ratios, however, choosing the appropriate matching algorithm is more important than selecting a balancing scores.     

Estimation of average treatment effects based on parametric propensity score model

In this paper, the estimation of average treatment effects is examined given that the propensity score is of a parametric form with some unknown parameters. Under the assumption that the treatment is ignorable given some observed characteristics, the MLEs for those unknown parameters in the probability assignment model have been achieved firstly and then three estimators have been defined by the inverse probability weighted, regression and imputation methods, respectively. All the estimators are shown asymptotically normal and more importantly, the substantial efficiency gains of the first two estimates have been obtained theoretically compared with the existing estimators in Hahn (1998) and Hirano et al. (2003), i.e., the inverse weighted probability estimator and the regression estimator have smaller asymptotic variances. Our simulation analysis verifies the theoretical results in terms of biases, SEs and MSEs.     

A Note on the Role of the Propensity Score for Estimating Average Treatment Effects

Hahn [Hahn, J. (1998). On the role of the propensity score in efficient semiparametric estimation of average treatment effects. Econometrica 66:315-331] derived the semiparametric efficiency bounds for estimating the average treatment effect (ATE) and the average treatment effect on the treated (ATET). The variance of ATET depends on whether the propensity score is known or unknown. Hahn attributes this to “dimension reduction.” In this paper, an alternative explanation is given: Knowledge of the propensity score improves upon the estimation of the distribution of the confounding variables.     

Correlation and efficiency of propensity score-based estimators for average causal effects

Propensity score-based estimators are commonly used to estimate causal effects in evaluation research. To reduce bias in observational studies, researchers might be tempted to include many, perhaps correlated, covariates when estimating the propensity score model. Taking into account that the propensity score is estimated, this study investigates how the efficiency of matching, inverse probability weighting, and doubly robust estimators change under the case of correlated covariates. Propositions regarding the large sample variances under certain assumptions on the data-generating process are given. The propositions are supplemented by several numerical large sample and finite sample results from a wide range of models. The results show that the covariate correlations may increase or decrease the variances of the estimators. There are several factors that influence how correlation affects the variance of the estimators, including the choice of estimator, the strength of the confounding toward outcome and treatment, and whether a constant or non-constant causal effect is present.     

A Bayesian nonparametric causal model

Typically, in the practice of causal inference from observational studies, a parametric model is assumed for the joint population density of potential outcomes and treatment assignments, and possibly this is accompanied by the assumption of no hidden bias. However, both assumptions are questionable for real data, the accuracy of causal inference is compromised when the data violates either assumption, and the parametric assumption precludes capturing a more general range of density shapes (e.g., heavier tail behavior and possible multi-modalities). We introduce a flexible, Bayesian nonparametric causal model to provide more accurate causal inferences. The model makes use of a stick-breaking prior, which has the flexibility to capture any multi-modalities, skewness and heavier tail behavior in this joint population density, while accounting for hidden bias. We prove the asymptotic consistency of the posterior distribution of the model, and illustrate our causal model through the analysis of small and large observational data sets.     

On the inefficiency of propensity score matching

Propensity score matching is now widely used in empirical applications for estimating treatment effects. Propensity score matching (PSM) is preferred to matching on X because of the lower dimension of the estimation problem. In this note, however, it is shown that PSM is inefficient compared to matching on X. Hence, matching on X should be considered as a serious alternative.     

Estimation of the average causal effect via multiple propensity score stratification

Suppose we are interested in estimating the average causal effect (ACE) for the population mean from observational study. Because of simplicity and ease of interpretation, stratification by a propensity score (PS) is widely used to adjust for influence of confounding factors in estimation of the ACE. Appropriateness of the estimation by the PS stratification relies on correct specification of the PS. We propose an estimator based on stratification with multiple PS models by clustering techniques instead of model selection. If one of them correctly specifies, the proposed estimator removes bias and thus is more robust than the standard PS stratification.     

Performance evaluation of propensity score methods for estimating average treatment effects with multi-level treatments*

The propensity score (PS) method is widely used to estimate the average treatment effect (TE) in observational studies. However, it is generally confined to the binary treatment assignment. In an extension to the settings of a multi-level treatment, Imbens proposed a generalized propensity score which is the conditional probability of receiving a particular level of the treatment given pre-treatment variables. The average TE can then be estimated by conditioning solely on the generalized PS under the assumption of weak unconfoundedness. In the present work, we adopted this approach and conducted extensive simulations to evaluate the performance of several methods using the generalized PS, including subclassification, matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and covariate adjustment. Compared with other methods, IPTW had the preferred overall performance. We then applied these methods to a retrospective cohort study of 228,876 pregnant women. The impact of the exposure to different types of the antidepressant medications (no exposure, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) only, non-SSRI only, and both) during pregnancy on several important infant outcomes (birth weight, gestation age, preterm labor, and respiratory distress) were assessed.     

Using information on realized effects to determine prospective causal effects

The potential outcomes approach to causal inference postulates that each individual has a number of possibly latent outcomes, each of which would be observed under a different treatment. For any individual, some of these outcomes will be unobservable or counterfactual. Information about post-treatment characteristics sometimes allows statements about what would have happened if an individual or group with these characteristics had received a different treatment. These are statements about the realized effects of the treatment. Determining the likely effect of an intervention before making a decision involves inference about effects in populations defined only by characteristics observed before decisions about treatment are made. Information on realized effects can tighten bounds on these prospectively defined measures of the intervention effect. We derive formulae for the bounds and their sampling variances and illustrate these points with data from a hypothetical study of the efficacy of screening mammography.     

Inference on local average treatment effects for misclassified treatment

We develop point-identification for the local average treatment effect when the binary treatment contains a measurement error. The standard instrumental variable estimator is inconsistent for the parameter since the measurement error is nonclassical by construction. We correct the problem by identifying the distribution of the measurement error based on the use of an exogenous variable that can even be a binary covariate. The moment conditions derived from the identification lead to generalized method of moments estimation with asymptotically valid inferences. Monte Carlo simulations and an empirical illustration demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed procedure.     

Semiparametric estimation and inference for distributional and general treatment effects

Summary.  There is a large literature on methods of analysis for randomized trials with noncompliance which focuses on the effect of treatment on the average outcome. The paper considers evaluating the effect of treatment on the entire distribution and general functions of this effect. For distributional treatment effects, fully non-parametric and fully parametric approaches have been proposed. The fully non-parametric approach could be inefficient but the fully parametric approach is not robust to the violation of distribution assumptions. We develop a semiparametric instrumental variable method based on the empirical likelihood approach. Our method can be applied to general outcomes and general functions of outcome distributions and allows us to predict a subject's latent compliance class on the basis of an observed outcome value in observed assignment and treatment received groups. Asymptotic results for the estimators and likelihood ratio statistic are derived. A simulation study shows that our estimators of various treatment effects are substantially more efficient than the currently used fully non-parametric estimators. The method is illustrated by an analysis of data from a randomized trial of an encouragement intervention to improve adherence to prescribed depression treatments among depressed elderly patients in primary care practices.     

Maximum entropy in the mean methods in propensity score matching for interval and noisy data

Abstract

In this paper, we propose maximum entropy in the mean methods for propensity score matching classification problems. We provide a new methodological approach and estimation algorithms to handle explicitly cases when data is available: (i) in interval form; (ii) with bounded measurement or observational errors; or (iii) both as intervals and with bounded errors. We show that entropy in the mean methods for these three cases generally outperform benchmark error-free approaches.     

Propensity score applied to survival data analysis through proportional hazards models: a Monte Carlo study

Propensity score methods are increasingly used in medical literature to estimate treatment effect using data from observational studies. Despite many papers on propensity score analysis, few have focused on the analysis of survival data. Even within the framework of the popular proportional hazard model, the choice among marginal, stratified or adjusted models remains unclear. A Monte Carlo simulation study was used to compare the performance of several survival models to estimate both marginal and conditional treatment effects. The impact of accounting or not for pairing when analysing propensity‐score‐matched survival data was assessed. In addition, the influence of unmeasured confounders was investigated. After matching on the propensity score, both marginal and conditional treatment effects could be reliably estimated. Ignoring the paired structure of the data led to an increased test size due to an overestimated variance of the treatment effect. Among the various survival models considered, stratified models systematically showed poorer performance. Omitting a covariate in the propensity score model led to a biased estimation of treatment effect, but replacement of the unmeasured confounder by a correlated one allowed a marked decrease in this bias. Our study showed that propensity scores applied to survival data can lead to unbiased estimation of both marginal and conditional treatment effect, when marginal and adjusted Cox models are used. In all cases, it is necessary to account for pairing when analysing propensity‐score‐matched data, using a robust estimator of the variance. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Propensity score prediction for electronic healthcare databases using super learner and high-dimensional propensity score methods

ABSTRACT

The optimal learner for prediction modeling varies depending on the underlying data-generating distribution. Super Learner (SL) is a generic ensemble learning algorithm that uses cross-validation to select among a ‘library’ of candidate prediction models. While SL has been widely studied in a number of settings, it has not been thoroughly evaluated in large electronic healthcare databases that are common in pharmacoepidemiology and comparative effectiveness research. In this study, we applied and evaluated the performance of SL in its ability to predict the propensity score (PS), the conditional probability of treatment assignment given baseline covariates, using three electronic healthcare databases. We considered a library of algorithms that consisted of both nonparametric and parametric models. We also proposed a novel strategy for prediction modeling that combines SL with the high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) variable selection algorithm. Predictive performance was assessed using three metrics: the negative log-likelihood, area under the curve (AUC), and time complexity. Results showed that the best individual algorithm, in terms of predictive performance, varied across datasets. The SL was able to adapt to the given dataset and optimize predictive performance relative to any individual learner. Combining the SL with the hdPS was the most consistent prediction method and may be promising for PS estimation and prediction modeling in electronic healthcare databases.     

基于协变量平衡加权的平均处理效应的稳健有效估计

倾向性得分是估计平均处理效应的重要工具。但在观察性研究中,通常会由于协变量在处理组与对照组分布的不平衡性而导致极端倾向性得分的出现,即存在十分接近于0或1的倾向性得分,这使得因果推断的强可忽略假设接近于违背,进而导致平均处理效应的估计出现较大的偏差与方差。Li等(2018a)提出了协变量平衡加权法,在无混杂性假设下通过实现协变量分布的加权平衡,解决了极端倾向性得分带来的影响。本文在此基础上,提出了基于协变量平衡加权法的稳健且有效的估计方法,并通过引入超级学习算法提升了模型在实证应用中的稳健性;更进一步,将前一方法推广至理论上不依赖于结果回归模型和倾向性得分模型假设的基于协变量平衡加权的稳健有效估计。蒙特卡洛模拟表明,本文提出的两种方法在结果回归模型和倾向性得分模型均存在误设时仍具有极小的偏差和方差。实证部分将两种方法应用于右心导管插入术数据,发现右心导管插入术大约会增加患者6. 3%死亡率。     

On the bias of factor score determinacy coefficients based on different estimation methods of the exploratory factor model

The factor score determinacy coefficient represents the common variance of the factor score predictor with the corresponding factor. The aim of the present simulation study was to compare the bias of determinacy coefficients based on different estimation methods of the exploratory factor model. Overall, determinacy coefficients computed from parameters based on maximum likelihood estimation, unweighted least squares estimation, and principal axis factoring were more precise than determinacy coefficients based on generalized least squares estimation and alpha factoring.     

Using generalized doubly robust estimator to estimate average treatment effects of multiple treatments in observational studies

The generalized doubly robust estimator is proposed for estimating the average treatment effect (ATE) of multiple treatments based on the generalized propensity score (GPS). In medical researches where observational studies are conducted, estimations of ATEs are usually biased since the covariate distributions could be unbalanced among treatments. To overcome this problem, Imbens [The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions, Biometrika 87 (2000), pp. 706–710] and Feng et al. [Generalized propensity score for estimating the average treatment effect of multiple treatments, Stat. Med. (2011), in press. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.4168/abstract] proposed weighted estimators that are extensions of a ratio estimator based on GPS to estimate ATEs with multiple treatments. However, the ratio estimator always produces a larger empirical sample variance than the doubly robust estimator, which estimates an ATE between two treatments based on the estimated propensity score (PS). We conduct a simulation study to compare the performance of our proposed estimator with Imbens’ and Feng et al.’s estimators, and simulation results show that our proposed estimator outperforms their estimators in terms of bias, empirical sample variance and mean-squared error of the estimated ATEs.     

Comparison of Type I error rates and statistical power of different propensity score methods

Propensity score analysis (PSA) is a technique to correct for potential confounding in observational studies. Covariate adjustment, matching, stratification, and inverse weighting are the four most commonly used methods involving propensity scores. The main goal of this research is to determine which PSA method performs the best in terms of protecting against spurious association detection, as measured by Type I error rate, while maintaining sufficient power to detect a true association, if one exists. An examination of these PSA methods along with ordinary least squares regression was conducted under two cases: correct PSA model specification and incorrect PSA model specification. PSA covariate adjustment and PSA matching maintain the nominal Type I error rate, when the PSA model is correctly specified, but only PSA covariate adjustment achieves adequate power levels. Other methods produced conservative Type I Errors in some scenarios, while liberal Type I error rates were observed in other scenarios.     

Estimating and using propensity score in presence of missing background data: an application to assess the impact of childbearing on wellbeing

Propensity score methods are an increasingly popular technique for causal inference. To estimate propensity scores, we must model the distribution of the treatment indicator given a vector of covariates. Much work has been done in the case where the covariates are fully observed. Unfortunately, many large scale and complex surveys, such as longitudinal surveys, suffer from missing covariate values. In this paper, we compare three different approaches and their underlying assumptions of handling missing background data in the estimation and use of propensity scores: a complete-case analysis, a pattern-mixture model based approach developed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (J Am Stat Assoc79:516–524, 1984), and a multiple imputation approach. We apply these methods to assess the impact of childbearing events on individuals’ wellbeing in Indonesia, using a sample of women from the Indonesia Family Life Survey. I am grateful to all the participants at the project “Poverty Dynamics and Fertility in Developing Countries” for their support and encouragement. Special thanks are due to Fabrizia Mealli for her insightful suggestions and discussions. I also thank Jungho Kim, who is the main author of the STATA code to produce Indonesia consumption expenditure. Finally, I thank Arnstein Aassve, and Letizia Mencarini for help working with the data and their very useful discussions, and Alexia Fuernkranz-Prskawetz, and Henriette Engelhardt for detailed comments and suggestions which have improved the paper. Financial support from CNR-EFS and COFIN 2005 is gratefully acknowledged.