BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

James M. Robins

James M. Robins contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Methodologymath.STStatistics TheoryMachine LearningApplicationsecon.EM

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
9works
0followers
6topics
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

9 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Coherent modeling of longitudinal causal effects on binary outcomes

Analyses of biomedical studies often necessitate modeling longitudinal causal effects. The current focus on personalized medicine and effect heterogeneity makes this task even more challenging. Towards this end, structural nested mean models (SNMMs) are fundamental tools for studying heterogeneous treatment effects in longitudinal studies. However, when outcomes are binary, current methods for estimating multiplicative and additive SNMM parameters suffer from variation dependence between the causal parameters and the non-causal nuisance parameters. This leads to a series of difficulties in interpretation, estimation and computation. These difficulties have hindered the uptake of SNMMs in biomedical practice, where binary outcomes are very common. We solve the variation dependence problem for the binary multiplicative SNMM via a reparametrization of the non-causal nuisance parameters. Our novel nuisance parameters are variation independent of the causal parameters, and hence allow for coherent modeling of heterogeneous effects from longitudinal studies with binary outcomes. Our parametrization also provides a key building block for flexible doubly robust estimation of the causal parameters. Along the way, we prove that an additive SNMM with binary outcomes does not admit a variation independent parametrization, thereby justifying the restriction to multiplicative SNMMs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Global sensitivity analysis for studies extending inferences from a randomized trial to a target population

When individuals participating in a randomized trial differ with respect to the distribution of effect modifiers compared compared with the target population where the trial results will be used, treatment effect estimates from the trial may not directly apply to target population. Methods for extending -- generalizing or transporting -- causal inferences from the trial to the target population rely on conditional exchangeability assumptions between randomized and non-randomized individuals. The validity of these assumptions is often uncertain or controversial and investigators need to examine how violation of the assumptions would impact study conclusions. We describe methods for global sensitivity analysis that directly parameterize violations of the assumptions in terms of potential (counterfactual) outcome distributions. Our approach does not require detailed knowledge about the distribution of specific unmeasured effect modifiers or their relationship with the observed variables. We illustrate the methods using data from a trial nested within a cohort of trial-eligible individuals to compare coronary artery surgery plus medical therapy versus medical therapy alone for stable ischemic heart disease.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Randomized trials and their observational emulations: a framework for benchmarking and joint analysis

A randomized trial and an analysis of observational data designed to emulate the trial sample observations separately, but have the same eligibility criteria, collect information on some shared baseline covariates, and compare the effects of the same treatments on the same outcomes. Treatment effect estimates from the trial and its emulation can be compared to benchmark observational analysis methods. In a simplified setting with complete adherence to the assigned treatment strategy and no loss-to-follow-up, we show that benchmarking relies on an exchangeability condition between the populations underlying the trial and its emulation, to account for differences in the distribution of covariates between them. When this exchangeability condition holds, and the usual conditions needed for the estimates from the trial and its emulation to have a causal interpretation also hold, we derive restrictions on the law of the observed data. When the data are compatible with the restrictions, joint analysis of the trial and its emulation is possible. When the data are incompatible with the restrictions, a discrepancy between (1) estimates based on extending inferences from the trial to the population underlying the emulation and (2) the emulation itself may reflect either inability to benchmark (e.g., due to selective participation into the trial) or a failure of the emulation (e.g., due to unmeasured confounding), but we cannot use the data to determine which is the case. Our analysis reveals how benchmarking attempts combine causal assumptions, data analysis methods, and substantive knowledge to examine the validity of observational analysis methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Efficient estimation of optimal regimes under a no direct effect assumption

We derive new estimators of an optimal joint testing and treatment regime under the no direct effect (NDE) assumption that a given laboratory, diagnostic, or screening test has no effect on a patient's clinical outcomes except through the effect of the test results on the choice of treatment. We model the optimal joint strategy using an optimal regime structural nested mean model (opt-SNMM). The proposed estimators are more efficient than previous estimators of the parameters of an opt-SNMM because they efficiently leverage the `no direct effect (NDE) of testing' assumption. Our methods will be of importance to decision scientists who either perform cost-benefit analyses or are tasked with the estimation of the `value of information' supplied by an expensive diagnostic test (such as an MRI to screen for lung cancer).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Locally Robust Semiparametric Estimation

Many economic and causal parameters depend on nonparametric or high dimensional first steps. We give a general construction of locally robust/orthogonal moment functions for GMM, where moment conditions have zero derivative with respect to first steps. We show that orthogonal moment functions can be constructed by adding to identifying moments the nonparametric influence function for the effect of the first step on identifying moments. Orthogonal moments reduce model selection and regularization bias, as is very important in many applications, especially for machine learning first steps. We give debiased machine learning estimators of functionals of high dimensional conditional quantiles and of dynamic discrete choice parameters with high dimensional state variables. We show that adding to identifying moments the nonparametric influence function provides a general construction of orthogonal moments, including regularity conditions, and show that the nonparametric influence function is robust to additional unknown functions on which it depends. We give a general approach to estimating the unknown functions in the nonparametric influence function and use it to automatically debias estimators of functionals of high dimensional conditional location learners. We give a variety of new doubly robust moment equations and characterize double robustness. We give general and simple regularity conditions and apply these for asymptotic inference on functionals of high dimensional regression quantiles and dynamic discrete choice parameters with high dimensional state variables.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On nearly assumption-free tests of nominal confidence interval coverage for causal parameters estimated by machine learning

For many causal effect parameters of interest, doubly robust machine learning (DRML) estimators $\hatψ_{1}$ are the state-of-the-art, incorporating the good prediction performance of machine learning; the decreased bias of doubly robust estimators; and the analytic tractability and bias reduction of sample splitting with cross fitting. Nonetheless, even in the absence of confounding by unmeasured factors, the nominal $(1 - α)$ Wald confidence interval $\hatψ_{1} \pm z_{α/ 2} \widehat{\mathsf{se}} [\hatψ_{1}]$ may still undercover even in large samples, because the bias of $\hatψ_{1}$ may be of the same or even larger order than its standard error of order $n^{-1/2}$. In this paper, we introduce essentially assumption-free tests that (i) can falsify the null hypothesis that the bias of $\hatψ_{1}$ is of smaller order than its standard error, (ii) can provide an upper confidence bound on the true coverage of the Wald interval, and (iii) are valid under the null under no smoothness/sparsity assumptions on the nuisance parameters. The tests, which we refer to as \underline{A}ssumption \underline{F}ree \underline{E}mpirical \underline{C}overage \underline{T}ests (AFECTs), are based on a U-statistic that estimates part of the bias of $\hatψ_{1}$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Separable Effects for Causal Inference in the Presence of Competing Events

In time-to-event settings, the presence of competing events complicates the definition of causal effects. Here we propose the new separable effects to study the causal effect of a treatment on an event of interest. The separable direct effect is the treatment effect on the event of interest not mediated by its effect on the competing event. The separable indirect effect is the treatment effect on the event of interest only through its effect on the competing event. Similar to Robins and Richardson's extended graphical approach for mediation analysis, the separable effects can only be identified under the assumption that the treatment can be decomposed into two distinct components that exert their effects through distinct causal pathways. Unlike existing definitions of causal effects in the presence of competing events, our estimands do not require cross-world contrasts or hypothetical interventions to prevent death. As an illustration, we apply our approach to a randomized clinical trial on estrogen therapy in individuals with prostate cancer.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access