IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ijbist/v12y2016i1p131-155n11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Case Study of the Impact of Data-Adaptive Versus Model-Based Estimation of the Propensity Scores on Causal Inferences from Three Inverse Probability Weighting Estimators

Author

Listed:
  • Neugebauer Romain

    (Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA)

  • Schmittdiel Julie A.

    (Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA)

  • van der Laan Mark J.

    (Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA)

Abstract

Objective: Consistent estimation of causal effects with inverse probability weighting estimators is known to rely on consistent estimation of propensity scores. To alleviate the bias expected from incorrect model specification for these nuisance parameters in observational studies, data-adaptive estimation and in particular an ensemble learning approach known as Super Learning has been proposed as an alternative to the common practice of estimation based on arbitrary model specification. While the theoretical arguments against the use of the latter haphazard estimation strategy are evident, the extent to which data-adaptive estimation can improve inferences in practice is not. Some practitioners may view bias concerns over arbitrary parametric assumptions as academic considerations that are inconsequential in practice. They may also be wary of data-adaptive estimation of the propensity scores for fear of greatly increasing estimation variability due to extreme weight values. With this report, we aim to contribute to the understanding of the potential practical consequences of the choice of estimation strategy for the propensity scores in real-world comparative effectiveness research.Method: We implement secondary analyses of Electronic Health Record data from a large cohort of type 2 diabetes patients to evaluate the effects of four adaptive treatment intensification strategies for glucose control (dynamic treatment regimens) on subsequent development or progression of urinary albumin excretion. Three Inverse Probability Weighting estimators are implemented using both model-based and data-adaptive estimation strategies for the propensity scores. Their practical performances for proper confounding and selection bias adjustment are compared and evaluated against results from previous randomized experiments.Conclusion: Results suggest both potential reduction in bias and increase in efficiency at the cost of an increase in computing time when using Super Learning to implement Inverse Probability Weighting estimators to draw causal inferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Neugebauer Romain & Schmittdiel Julie A. & van der Laan Mark J., 2016. "A Case Study of the Impact of Data-Adaptive Versus Model-Based Estimation of the Propensity Scores on Causal Inferences from Three Inverse Probability Weighting Estimators," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 131-155, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:131-155:n:11
    DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2015-0028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2015-0028
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ijb-2015-0028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Murphy S.A. & van der Laan M.J. & Robins J.M., 2001. "Marginal Mean Models for Dynamic Regimes," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 1410-1423, December.
    2. Sinisi Sandra E & van der Laan Mark J., 2004. "Deletion/Substitution/Addition Algorithm in Learning with Applications in Genomics," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-40, August.
    3. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noémi Kreif & Oleg Sofrygin & Julie A. Schmittdiel & Alyce S. Adams & Richard W. Grant & Zheng Zhu & Mark J. van der Laan & Romain Neugebauer, 2021. "Exploiting nonsystematic covariate monitoring to broaden the scope of evidence about the causal effects of adaptive treatment strategies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 329-342, March.
    2. Lan Wen & Miguel A. Hernán & James M. Robins, 2022. "Multiply robust estimators of causal effects for survival outcomes," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 49(3), pages 1304-1328, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Frölich & Martin Huber, 2014. "Treatment Evaluation With Multiple Outcome Periods Under Endogeneity and Attrition," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(508), pages 1697-1711, December.
    2. Hongming Pu & Bo Zhang, 2021. "Estimating optimal treatment rules with an instrumental variable: A partial identification learning approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(2), pages 318-345, April.
    3. Matthew Blackwell & Anton Strezhnev, 2022. "Telescope matching for reducing model dependence in the estimation of the effects of time‐varying treatments: An application to negative advertising," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(1), pages 377-399, January.
    4. Shuxiao Chen & Bo Zhang, 2021. "Estimating and Improving Dynamic Treatment Regimes With a Time-Varying Instrumental Variable," Papers 2104.07822, arXiv.org.
    5. van de Walle, Dominique & Mu, Ren, 2007. "Fungibility and the flypaper effect of project aid: Micro-evidence for Vietnam," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 667-685, November.
    6. Lechner, Michael, 2018. "Modified Causal Forests for Estimating Heterogeneous Causal Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 12040, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. Turner, Alex J. & Fichera, Eleonora & Sutton, Matt, 2021. "The effects of in-utero exposure to influenza on mental health and mortality risk throughout the life-course," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    9. Roxana Elena Manea, 2021. "School Feeding Programmes, Education and Food Security in Rural Malawi," CIES Research Paper series 63-2020, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    10. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    11. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    12. repec:ags:jrapmc:122316 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Gunther Bensch & Jörg Peters, 2013. "Alleviating Deforestation Pressures? Impacts of Improved Stove Dissemination on Charcoal Consumption in Urban Senegal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 676-698.
    14. G. Miller & Yuriy Pylypchuk, 2014. "Marital Status, Spousal Characteristics, and the Use of Preventive Care," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 323-338, September.
    15. Kitagawa, Toru & Muris, Chris, 2016. "Model averaging in semiparametric estimation of treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 271-289.
    16. Michael Lechner & Ruth Miquel & Conny Wunsch, 2011. "Long‐Run Effects Of Public Sector Sponsored Training In West Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 742-784, August.
    17. Li, Linjie & Liu, Xiaming & Yuan, Dong & Yu, Miaojie, 2017. "Does outward FDI generate higher productivity for emerging economy MNEs? – Micro-level evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 839-854.
    18. Olivier Dagnelie & Philippe Lemay‐Boucher, 2012. "Rosca Participation in Benin: A Commitment Issue," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 74(2), pages 235-252, April.
    19. Frölich, Markus & Lechner, Michael, 2010. "Exploiting Regional Treatment Intensity for the Evaluation of Labor Market Policies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(491), pages 1014-1029.
    20. Ralf Becker & Maggy Fostier, 2015. "Evaluating non-compulsory educational interventions - the case of peer assisted study groups," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1509, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    21. Katie Meara & Francesco Pastore & Allan Webster, 2020. "The gender pay gap in the USA: a matching study," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 271-305, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:131-155:n:11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.