Biometrika Advance Access originally published online on January 28, 2008
Biometrika 2008 95(1):35-47; doi:10.1093/biomet/asm097
Articles |
Population intervention models in causal inference
Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, U.S.A. hubbard{at}stat.berkeley.edu laan{at}stat.berkeley.edu
Received for publication 1 November 2005. Revision received 1 June 2007.
We propose a new causal parameter, which is a natural extension of existing approaches to causal inference such as marginal structural models. Modelling approaches are proposed for the difference between a treatment-specific counterfactual population distribution and the actual population distribution of an outcome in the target population of interest. Relevant parameters describe the effect of a hypothetical intervention on such a population and therefore we refer to these models as population intervention models. We focus on intervention models estimating the effect of an intervention in terms of a difference and ratio of means, called risk difference and relative risk if the outcome is binary. We provide a class of inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted and doubly-robust estimators of the causal parameters in these models. The finite-sample performance of these new estimators is explored in a simulation study.
Key Words: Attributable risk • Causal inference • Confounding • Counterfactual • Doubly-robust estimation • G-computation estimation • Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted estimation
References
-
Neugebauer R., van der Laan M. J. Nonparametric causal effects based on marginal structural models. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. (2006) 137:419–34.[CrossRef]
Robins J. M. The analysis of randomized and non-randomized AIDS treatment trials using a new approach in causal inference in longitudinal studies. In: Health Service Methodology: A Focus on AIDS—Sechrest L., Freeman H., Mulley A., eds. (1989) Washington, DC: U.S. Public Health Service, National Center for Health Services research. 113–59.
Robins J. M. Correcting for non-compliance in randomized trials using structural nested mean models. Commun. Statist. A (1994) 23:2379–412.
Robins J. M. Marginal structural models versus structural nested models as tools for causal inference. In: Statistical Models in Epidemiology, the Environment, and Clinical Trials—Halloran M. E., Berry D., eds. (2000) New York: Springer. 95–113.
Robins J. M., Hernan M. A., Brumback B. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology (2000) 11:550–60.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Robins J. M., Rotnitzky A. Recovery of information and adjustment for dependent censoring using surrogate markers. In: AIDS Epidemiology: Methodological Issues—Jewell N.P., Dietz K., Farewell V. T., eds. (1992) Boston, MA: Birkhäuser. 24–33.
Rubin D. B. Bayesian inference for causal effects: the role of randomization. Ann. Statist. (1978) 6:34–58.[CrossRef]
Rubin D. B. Comment on a paper by P.W. Holland. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. (1986) 81:961–2.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
van der Laan M., Robins J. Unified Methods for Censored Longitudinal Data and Causality (2002) New York: Springer.
van der Laan M. J., Hubbard A., Jewell N. P. Estimation of treatment effects in randomized trials with noncompliance and a dichotomous outcome. J. R. Statist. Soc. B (2007) 69:463–82.[CrossRef]
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Ahern, A. Hubbard, and S. Galea Estimating the Effects of Potential Public Health Interventions on Population Disease Burden: A Step-by-Step Illustration of Causal Inference Methods Am. J. Epidemiol., May 1, 2009; 169(9): 1140 - 1147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||