Researcher profile

Eric J. Tchetgen Tchetgen

Eric J. Tchetgen Tchetgen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Semiparametric Approach to Model-based Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Studies

When drawing causal inference from observational data, there is always concern about unmeasured confounding. One way to tackle this is to conduct a sensitivity analysis. One widely-used sensitivity analysis framework hypothesizes the existence of a scalar unmeasured confounder U and asks how the causal conclusion would change were U measured and included in the primary analysis. Works along this line often make various parametric assumptions on U, for the sake of mathematical and computational simplicity. In this article, we further this line of research by developing a valid sensitivity analysis that leaves the distribution of U unrestricted. Our semiparametric estimator has three desirable features compared to many existing methods in the literature. First, our method allows for a larger and more flexible family of models, and mitigates observable implications (Franks et al., 2019). Second, our methods work seamlessly with any primary analysis that models the outcome regression parametrically. Third, our method is easy to use and interpret. We construct both pointwise confidence intervals and confidence bands that are uniformly valid over a given sensitivity parameter space, thus formally accounting for unknown sensitivity parameters. We apply our proposed method on an influential yet controversial study of the causal relationship between war experiences and political activeness using observational data from Uganda.

preprint2022arXiv

Proximal Causal Inference for Complex Longitudinal Studies

A standard assumption for causal inference about the joint effects of time-varying treatment is that one has measured sufficient covariates to ensure that within covariate strata, subjects are exchangeable across observed treatment values, also known as "sequential randomization assumption (SRA)". SRA is often criticized as it requires one to accurately measure all confounders. Realistically, measured covariates can rarely capture all confounders with certainty. Often covariate measurements are at best proxies of confounders, thus invalidating inferences under SRA. In this paper, we extend the proximal causal inference (PCI) framework of Miao et al. (2018) to the longitudinal setting under a semiparametric marginal structural mean model (MSMM). PCI offers an opportunity to learn about joint causal effects in settings where SRA based on measured time-varying covariates fails, by formally accounting for the covariate measurements as imperfect proxies of underlying confounding mechanisms. We establish nonparametric identification with a pair of time-varying proxies and provide a corresponding characterization of regular and asymptotically linear estimators of the parameter indexing the MSMM, including a rich class of doubly robust estimators, and establish the corresponding semiparametric efficiency bound for the MSMM. Extensive simulation studies and a data application illustrate the finite sample behavior of proposed methods.

preprint2022arXiv

Proximal Causal Inference for Marginal Counterfactual Survival Curves

Contrasting marginal counterfactual survival curves across treatment arms is an effective and popular approach for inferring the causal effect of an intervention on a right-censored time-to-event outcome. A key challenge to drawing such inferences in observational settings is the possible existence of unmeasured confounding, which may invalidate most commonly used methods that assume no hidden confounding bias. In this paper, rather than making the standard no unmeasured confounding assumption, we extend the recently proposed proximal causal inference framework of Miao et al. (2018), Tchetgen et al. (2020), Cui et al. (2020) to obtain nonparametric identification of a causal survival contrast by leveraging observed covariates as imperfect proxies of unmeasured confounders. Specifically, we develop a proximal inverse probability-weighted (PIPW) estimator, the proximal analog of standard IPW, which allows the observed data distribution for the time-to-event outcome to remain completely unrestricted. PIPW estimation relies on a parametric model for a so-called treatment confounding bridge function relating the treatment process to confounding proxies. As a result, PIPW might be sensitive to model misspecification. To improve robustness and efficiency, we also propose a proximal doubly robust estimator and establish uniform consistency and asymptotic normality of both estimators. We conduct extensive simulations to examine the finite sample performance of our estimators, and proposed methods are applied to a study evaluating the effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the intensive care unit of critically ill patients.

preprint2020arXiv

A coherent likelihood parametrization for doubly robust estimation of a causal effect with missing confounders

Missing data and confounding are two problems researchers face in observational studies for comparative effectiveness. Williamson et al. (2012) recently proposed a unified approach to handle both issues concurrently using a multiply-robust (MR) methodology under the assumption that confounders are missing at random. Their approach considers a union of models in which any submodel has a parametric component while the remaining models are unrestricted. We show that while their estimating function is MR in theory, the possibility for multiply robust inference is complicated by the fact that parametric models for different components of the union model are not variation independent and therefore the MR property is unlikely to hold in practice. To address this, we propose an alternative transparent parametrization of the likelihood function, which makes explicit the model dependencies between various nuisance functions needed to evaluate the MR efficient score. The proposed method is genuinely doubly-robust (DR) in that it is consistent and asymptotic normal if one of two sets of modeling assumptions holds. We evaluate the performance and doubly robust property of the DR method via a simulation study.

preprint2020arXiv

Counterexamples to "The Blessings of Multiple Causes" by Wang and Blei

This note has been updated (April, 2020) to respond to "Towards Clarifying the Theory of the Deconfounder" by Yixin Wang, David M. Blei (arXiv:2003.04948). This original note, posted in January, 2020, is meant to complement our previous comment on "The Blessings of Multiple Causes" by Wang and Blei (2019). We provide a more succinct and transparent explanation of the fact that the deconfounder does not control for multi-cause confounding. The argument given in Wang and Blei (2019) makes two mistakes: (1) attempting to infer independence conditional on one variable from independence conditional on a different, unrelated variable, and (2) attempting to infer joint independence from pairwise independence. We give two simple counterexamples to the deconfounder claim.

preprint2020arXiv

Generalized interpretation and identification of separable effects in competing event settings

In competing event settings, a counterfactual contrast of cause-specific cumulative incidences quantifies the total causal effect of a treatment on the event of interest. However, effects of treatment on the competing event may indirectly contribute to this total effect, complicating its interpretation. We previously proposed the separable effects (Stensrud et al, 2019) to define direct and indirect effects of the treatment on the event of interest. This definition presupposes a treatment decomposition into two components acting along two separate causal pathways, one exclusively outside of the competing event and the other exclusively through it. Unlike previous definitions of direct and indirect effects, the separable effects can be subject to empirical scrutiny in a study where separate interventions on the treatment components are available. Here we extend and generalize the notion of the separable effects in several ways, allowing for interpretation, identification and estimation under considerably weaker assumptions. We propose and discuss a definition of separable effects that is applicable to general time-varying structures, where the separable effects can still be meaningfully interpreted, even when they cannot be regarded as direct and indirect effects. We further derive weaker conditions for identification of separable effects in observational studies where decomposed treatments are not yet available; in particular, these conditions allow for time-varying common causes of the event of interest, the competing events and loss to follow-up. For these general settings, we propose semi-parametric weighted estimators that are straightforward to implement. As an illustration, we apply the estimators to study the separable effects of intensive blood pressure therapy on acute kidney injury, using data from a randomized clinical trial.

preprint2020arXiv

Quantifying and Detecting Individual Level `Always Survivor' Causal Effects Under `Truncation by Death' and Censoring Through Time

The analysis of causal effects when the outcome of interest is possibly truncated by death has a long history in statistics and causal inference. The survivor average causal effect is commonly identified with more assumptions than those guaranteed by the design of a randomized clinical trial or using sensitivity analysis. This paper demonstrates that individual level causal effects in the `always survivor' principal stratum can be identified with no stronger identification assumptions than randomization. We illustrate the practical utility of our methods using data from a clinical trial on patients with prostate cancer. Our methodology is the first and, as of yet, only proposed procedure that enables detecting causal effects in the presence of truncation by death using only the assumptions that are guaranteed by design of the clinical trial. This methodology is applicable to all types of outcomes.