Sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding in causal inference based on exponential tilting and super learner

被引:2
|
作者
Zhou, Mi [1 ]
Yao, Weixin [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Riverside, Dept Stat, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
关键词
Causal inference; unmeasured confounding; sensitivity analysis; super learner; MARGINAL STRUCTURAL MODELS; SEMIPARAMETRIC REGRESSION; REPEATED OUTCOMES; PROPENSITY SCORE;
D O I
10.1080/02664763.2021.1999398
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Causal inference under the potential outcome framework relies on the strongly ignorable treatment assumption. This assumption is usually questionable in observational studies, and the unmeasured confounding is one of the fundamental challenges in causal inference. To this end, we propose a new sensitivity analysis method to evaluate the impact of the unmeasured confounder by leveraging ideas of doubly robust estimators, the exponential tilt method, and the super learner algorithm. Compared to other existing methods of sensitivity analysis that parameterize the unmeasured confounder as a latent variable in the working models, the exponential tilting method does not impose any restrictions on the structure or models of the unmeasured confounders. In addition, in order to reduce the modeling bias of traditional parametric methods, we propose incorporating the super learner machine learning algorithm to perform nonparametric model estimation and the corresponding sensitivity analysis. Furthermore, most existing sensitivity analysis methods require multivariate sensitivity parameters, which make its choice difficult and subjective in practice. In comparison, the new method has a univariate sensitivity parameter with a nice and simple interpretation of log-odds ratios for binary outcomes, which makes its choice and the application of the new sensitivity analysis method very easy for practitioners.
引用
收藏
页码:744 / 760
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Multiply robust causal inference with double-negative control adjustment for categorical unmeasured confounding
    Shi, Xu
    Miao, Wang
    Nelson, Jennifer C.
    Tchetgen Tchetgen, Eric J.
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 2020, 82 (02) : 521 - 540
  • [22] Using instrumental variables to address unmeasured confounding in causal mediation analysis
    Rudolph, Kara E.
    Williams, Nicholas
    Diaz, Ivan
    BIOMETRICS, 2024, 80 (01)
  • [23] A comparison of Bayesian and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding
    McCandless, Lawrence C.
    Gustafson, Paul
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (18) : 2887 - 2901
  • [24] Sensitivity Analysis for Effects of Multiple Exposures in the Presence of Unmeasured Confounding
    Jeong, Boram
    Lee, Seungjae
    Ye, Shinhee
    Lee, Donghwan
    Lee, Woojoo
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2025, 67 (01)
  • [25] EVALUATING COSTS WITH UNMEASURED CONFOUNDING: A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS FOR THE TREATMENT EFFECT
    Handorf, Elizabeth A.
    Bekelman, Justin E.
    Heitjan, Daniel F.
    Mitra, Nandita
    ANNALS OF APPLIED STATISTICS, 2013, 7 (04): : 2062 - 2080
  • [26] Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.
    McCandless, LC
    Gustafson, P
    Levy, AR
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 161 (11) : S88 - S88
  • [27] A cautionary note on a recently proposed sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding
    Ciocanea-Teodorescu, Iuliana
    Sjolander, Arvid
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2021, 50 (03) : 711 - 716
  • [28] A commentary on 'A comparison of Bayesian and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding'
    Greenland, Sander
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (20) : 3278 - 3280
  • [29] Sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in principal stratification settings with binary variables
    Schwartz, Scott
    Li, Fan
    Reiter, Jerome P.
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 31 (10) : 949 - 962
  • [30] A note on a sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding, and the related E-value
    Sjolander, Arvid
    JOURNAL OF CAUSAL INFERENCE, 2020, 8 (01) : 229 - 248