Electrochemical analysis of endosulfan using a C18-modified carbon-paste electrode.

H. El Bakouri,J. M. Palacios-Santander,L. Cubillana-Aguilera,A. Ouassini,I. Naranjo-Rodríguez,J. L. Hidalgo-Hidalgo de Cisneros

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE.2005.02.052

IF: 8.8

2005-09-01

Chemosphere

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Propensity score analysis for time-dependent exposure

Zhongheng Zhang,Xiuyang Li,Xiao Wu,Huixian Qiu,Hongying Shi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.01.33

IF: 3.616

2020-01-01

Annals of Translational Medicine

Abstract:Propensity score analysis (PSA) is widely used in medical literature to account for confounders. Conventionally, the propensity score (PS) is calculated by a binary logistic regression model using time-fixed covariates. In the presence of time-varying treatment or exposure, the conventional method may cause bias because subjects with early and late exposure are treated as the same. In effect, subjects who are treated latter can be different from those who are treated early. Thus, the conventional PSA must be modified to address this bias. In this paper, we illustrate how to perform analysis in the presence of time-dependent exposure. We conduct a simulation study with a known treatment effect. In the simulation study, we find the PSA method that directly adjust PS estimated by either a binary logistic regression model or a Cox regression model using time-fixed covariates still introduce significant bias. On the other hand, the time-dependent PS matching can help to achieve a result approaching the true effect. After time-dependent PS matching, the matched cohort can be analyzed with conventional Cox regression model or conditional logistic regression (CLR) model with time strata. The performance is comparable to the correctly specified Cox regression model with time-varying covariates (i.e., adjusting the exposure in a multivariable model as a time-varying covariate). We further develop a function called TDPSMQ for time-dependent PS matching and it is applied to a real world dataset.
Calibrated and Conformal Propensity Scores for Causal Effect Estimation

Shachi Deshpande,Volodymyr Kuleshov

2024-06-05

Abstract:Propensity scores are commonly used to estimate treatment effects from observational data. We argue that the probabilistic output of a learned propensity score model should be calibrated -- i.e., a predictive treatment probability of 90% should correspond to 90% of individuals being assigned the treatment group -- and we propose simple recalibration techniques to ensure this property. We prove that calibration is a necessary condition for unbiased treatment effect estimation when using popular inverse propensity weighted and doubly robust estimators. We derive error bounds on causal effect estimates that directly relate to the quality of uncertainties provided by the probabilistic propensity score model and show that calibration strictly improves this error bound while also avoiding extreme propensity weights. We demonstrate improved causal effect estimation with calibrated propensity scores in several tasks including high-dimensional image covariates and genome-wide association studies (GWASs). Calibrated propensity scores improve the speed of GWAS analysis by more than two-fold by enabling the use of simpler models that are faster to train.

Methodology,Machine Learning
Deep Learning-based Propensity Scores for Confounding Control in Comparative Effectiveness Research A Large-scale, Real-world Data Study

Janick Weberpals,Tim Becker,Jessica Davies,Fabian Schmich,Dominik Ruettinger,Fabian J. Theis,Anna Bauer-Mehren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000001338

2021-01-01

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Abstract:Background: Due to the non-randomized nature of real-world data, prognostic factors need to be balanced, which is often done by propensity scores (PSs). This study aimed to investigate whether autoencoders, which are unsupervised deep learning architectures, might be leveraged to compute PS. Methods: We selected patient-level data of 128,368 first-line treated cancer patients from the Flatiron Health EHR-derived de-identified database. We trained an autoencoder architecture to learn a lower-dimensional patient representation, which we used to compute PS. To compare the performance of an autoencoder-based PS with established methods, we performed a simulation study. We assessed the balancing and adjustment performance using standardized mean differences, root mean square errors (RMSE), percent bias, and confidence interval coverage. To illustrate the application of the autoencoder-based PS, we emulated the PRONOUNCE trial by applying the trial's protocol elements within an observational database setting, comparing two chemotherapy regimens. Results: All methods but the manual variable selection approach led to well-balanced cohorts with average standardized mean differences <0.1. LASSO yielded on average the lowest deviation of resulting estimates (RMSE 0.0205) followed by the autoencoder approach (RMSE 0.0248). Altering the hyperparameter setup in sensitivity analysis, the autoencoder approach led to similar results as LASSO (RMSE 0.0203 and 0.0205, respectively). In the case study, all methods provided a similar conclusion with point estimates clustered around the null (e.g., HRautoencoder 1.01 [95% confidence interval = 0.80, 1.27] vs. HRPRONOUNCE 1.07 [0.83, 1.36]). Conclusions: Autoencoder-based PS computation was a feasible approach to control for confounding but did not perform better than some established approaches like LASSO.
Propensity Score Method: a Non-Parametric Technique to Reduce Model Dependence

Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.08.57

IF: 3.616

2017-01-01

Annals of Translational Medicine

Abstract:Propensity score analysis (PSA) is a powerful technique that it balances pretreatment covariates, making the causal effect inference from observational data as reliable as possible. The use of PSA in medical literature has increased exponentially in recent years, and the trend continue to rise. The article introduces rationales behind PSA, followed by illustrating how to perform PSA in R with MatchIt package. There are a variety of methods available for PS matching such as nearest neighbors, full matching, exact matching and genetic matching. The task can be easily done by simply assigning a string value to the method argument in the matchit() function. The generic summary() and plot() functions can be applied to an object of class matchit to check covariate balance after matching. Furthermore, there is a useful package PSAgraphics that contains several graphical functions to check covariate balance between treatment groups across strata. If covariate balance is not achieved, one can modify model specifications or use other techniques such as random forest and recursive partitioning to better represent the underlying structure between pretreatment covariates and treatment assignment. The process can be repeated until the desirable covariate balance is achieved.
Using Propensity Scores to Estimate Effects of Treatment Initiation Decisions: State of the Science

Michael Webster-Clark,Til Sturmer,Tiansheng Wang,Kenneth Man,Danica Marinac-Dabic,Kenneth J. Rothman,Alan R. Ellis,Mugdha Gokhale,Mark Lunt,Cynthia Girman,Robert J. Glynn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8866

2021-01-01

Abstract:Confounding can cause substantial bias in nonexperimental studies that aim to estimate causal effects. Propensity score methods allow researchers to reduce bias from measured confounding by summarizing the distributions of many measured confounders in a single score based on the probability of receiving treatment. This score can then be used to mitigate imbalances in the distributions of these measured confounders between those who received the treatment of interest and those in the comparator population, resulting in less biased treatment effect estimates. This methodology was formalized by Rosenbaum and Rubin in 1983 and, since then, has been used increasingly often across a wide variety of scientific disciplines. In this review article, we provide an overview of propensity scores in the context of real-world evidence generation with a focus on their use in the setting of single treatment decisions, that is, choosing between two therapeutic options. We describe five aspects of propensity score analysis: alignment with the potential outcomes framework, implications for study design, estimation procedures, implementation options, and reporting. We add context to these concepts by highlighting how the types of comparator used, the implementation method, and balance assessment techniques have changed over time. Finally, we discuss evolving applications of propensity scores.
Propensity score analysis with latent covariates: Measurement error bias correction using the covariate's posterior mean, aka the inclusive factor score

Trang Quynh Nguyen,Elizabeth A. Stuart

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.12709

2020-02-12

Abstract:We address measurement error bias in propensity score (PS) analysis due to covariates that are latent variables. In the setting where latent covariate $X$ is measured via multiple error-prone items $\mathbf{W}$, PS analysis using several proxies for $X$ -- the $\mathbf{W}$ items themselves, a summary score (mean/sum of the items), or the conventional factor score (cFS , i.e., predicted value of $X$ based on the measurement model) -- often results in biased estimation of the causal effect, because balancing the proxy (between exposure conditions) does not balance $X$. We propose an improved proxy: the conditional mean of $X$ given the combination of $\mathbf{W}$, the observed covariates $Z$, and exposure $A$, denoted $X_{WZA}$. The theoretical support, which applies whether $X$ is latent or not (but is unobserved), is that balancing $X_{WZA}$ (e.g., via weighting or matching) implies balancing the mean of $X$. For a latent $X$, we estimate $X_{WZA}$ by the inclusive factor score (iFS) -- predicted value of $X$ from a structural equation model that captures the joint distribution of $(X,\mathbf{W},A)$ given $Z$. Simulation shows that PS analysis using the iFS substantially improves balance on the first five moments of $X$ and reduces bias in the estimated causal effect. Hence, within the proxy variables approach, we recommend this proxy over existing ones. We connect this proxy method to known results about weighting/matching functions (Lockwood & McCaffrey, 2016; McCaffrey, Lockwood, & Setodji, 2013). We illustrate the method in handling latent covariates when estimating the effect of out-of-school suspension on risk of later police arrests using Add Health data.

Methodology
Propensity Score Analysis with Guaranteed Subgroup Balance

Yan Li,Yong-Fang Kuo,Liang Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2404.11713

2024-04-18

Abstract:Estimating the causal treatment effects by subgroups is important in observational studies when the treatment effect heterogeneity may be present. Existing propensity score methods rely on a correctly specified propensity score model. Model misspecification results in biased treatment effect estimation and covariate imbalance. We proposed a new algorithm, the propensity score analysis with guaranteed subgroup balance (G-SBPS), to achieve covariate mean balance in all subgroups. We further incorporated nonparametric kernel regression for the propensity scores and developed a kernelized G-SBPS (kG-SBPS) to improve the subgroup mean balance of covariate transformations in a rich functional class. This extension is more robust to propensity score model misspecification. Extensive numerical studies showed that G-SBPS and kG-SBPS improve both subgroup covariate balance and subgroup treatment effect estimation, compared to existing approaches. We applied G-SBPS and kG-SBPS to a dataset on right heart catheterization to estimate the subgroup average treatment effects on the hospital length of stay and a dataset on diabetes self-management training to estimate the subgroup average treatment effects for the treated on the hospitalization rate.

Methodology
The Impact of Confounder Selection in Propensity Scores for Rare Events Data - with Applications to Birth Defects

Ronghui Xu,Jue Hou,Christina D. Chambers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1702.07009

2017-02-23

Abstract:Our work was motivated by a recent study on birth defects of infants born to pregnant women exposed to a certain medication for treating chronic diseases. Outcomes such as birth defects are rare events in the general population, which often translate to very small numbers of events in the unexposed group. As drug safety studies in pregnancy are typically observational in nature, we control for confounding in this rare events setting using propensity scores (PS). Using our empirical data, we noticed that the estimated odds ratio for birth defects due to exposure varied drastically depending on the specific approach used. The commonly used approaches with PS are matching, stratification, inverse probability weighting (IPW) and regression adjustment. The extremely rare events setting renders the matching or stratification infeasible. In addition, the PS itself may be formed via different approaches to select confounders from a relatively long list of potential confounders. We carried out simulation experiments to compare different combinations of approaches: IPW or regression adjustment, with 1) including all potential confounders without selection, 2) selection based on univariate association between the candidate variable and the outcome, 3) selection based on change in effects (CIE). The simulation showed that IPW without selection leads to extremely large variances in the estimated odds ratio, which help to explain the empirical data analysis results that we had observed. The simulation also showed that IPW with selection based on univariate association with the outcome is preferred over IPW with CIE. Regression adjustment has small variances of the estimated odds ratio regardless of the selection methods used.

Applications
Estimating generalized propensity scores with survey and attrition weighted data

Daniel F. McCaffrey,Beth Ann Griffin,Michael Robbins,Yajnaseni Chakraborti,Donna L. Coffman,Brian Vegetabile

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.10039

2024-03-28

Statistics in Medicine

Abstract:Prior work in causal inference has shown that using survey sampling weights in the propensity score estimation stage and the outcome model stage for binary treatments can result in a more robust estimator of the effect of the binary treatment being analyzed. However, to date, extending this work to continuous treatments and exposures has not been explored nor has consideration been given for how to handle attrition weights in the propensity score model. Nonetheless, generalized propensity score (GPS) analyses are being used for estimating continuous treatment effects on outcomes when researchers have observational data, and those data sets often have survey or attrition weights that need to be accounted for in the analysis. Here, we extend prior work and show with analytic results that using survey sampling or attrition weights in the GPS estimation stage and the outcome model stage for continuous treatments can result in a more robust estimator than one that does not. Simulation study results show that, although using weights in both estimation stages is sufficient for robust estimation, it is not necessary and unbiased estimation is possible in some cases under various approaches to using weights in estimation. Analysts do not know if the conditions of our simulation studies hold, so use of weights in both estimation stages might provide insurance for reducing potential bias. We discuss the implications of our results in the context of an empirical example.

public, environmental & occupational health,medicine, research & experimental,medical informatics,mathematical & computational biology,statistics & probability
[Application of Propensity Score Matching in the Design of an Epidemiological Study].

Zhi-wen Li,Le Zhang,Jian-meng Liu,Ai-guo Ren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2009.05.025

2009-01-01

Abstract:INTRODUCTION:In this article, we presented the rationale and calculation procedures of the propensity score matching (PSM), and its application in the designing stage of an epidemiological study. Based on existing observational data, PSM can be used to select one or more comparable controls for each subject in 'treatment' group according to the propensity scores estimated by 'treatment' variable and main covariates. The results of an example analysis showed that the bias for main confounders between the treated and control samples declined more than 55% after PMS.CONCLUSION:PSM can reduce most of the confounding bias of the observational study, and can obtain approximate study effect to the randomized controlled trials when used in the designing of the epidemiological study.
Incorporating baseline covariates to validate surrogate endpoints with a constant biomarker under control arm

Emily Roberts,Michael Elliott,Jeremy M. G. Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2104.12947

2022-02-03

Abstract:A surrogate endpoint S in a clinical trial is an outcome that may be measured earlier or more easily than the true outcome of interest T. In this work, we extend causal inference approaches to validate such a surrogate using potential outcomes. The causal association paradigm assesses the relationship of the treatment effect on the surrogate with the treatment effect on the true endpoint. Using the principal surrogacy criteria, we utilize the joint conditional distribution of the potential outcomes T, given the potential outcomes S. In particular, our setting of interest allows us to assume the surrogate under the placebo, S(0), is zero-valued, and we incorporate baseline covariates in the setting of normally-distributed endpoints. We develop Bayesian methods to incorporate conditional independence and other modeling assumptions and explore their impact on the assessment of surrogacy. We demonstrate our approach via simulation and data that mimics an ongoing study of a muscular dystrophy gene therapy.

Methodology
Propensity Score Methods for Creating Covariate Balance in Observational Studies

Cassandra W. Pattanayak,Donald B. Rubin,Elizabeth R. Zell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2011.06.008

IF: 7.05

2011-01-01

Revista Española de Cardiología

Abstract:Randomization of treatment assignment in experiments generates treatment groups with approximately balanced baseline covariates. However, in observational studies, where treatment assignment is not random, patients in the active treatment and control groups often differ on crucial covariates that are related to outcomes. These covariate imbalances can lead to biased treatment effect estimates. The propensity score is the probability that a patient with particular baseline characteristics is assigned to active treatment rather than control. Though propensity scores are unknown in observational studies, by matching or subclassifying patients on estimated propensity scores, we can design observational studies that parallel randomized experiments, with approximate balance on observed covariates. Observational study designs based on estimated propensity scores can generate approximately unbiased treatment effect estimates. Critically, propensity score designs should be created without access to outcomes, mirroring the separation of study design and outcome analysis in randomized experiments. This paper describes the potential outcomes framework for causal inference and best practices for designing observational studies with propensity scores. We discuss the use of propensity scores in two studies assessing the effectiveness and risks of antifibrinolytic drugs during cardiac surgery.
Surrogacy Beyond Prognosis: The Importance of “Trial-Level” Surrogacy

Marc Buyse,Everardo D Saad,Tomasz Burzykowski,Meredith M Regan,Christopher S Sweeney

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyac006

2022-03-04

The Oncologist

Abstract:Abstract Many candidate surrogate endpoints are currently assessed using a 2-level statistical approach, which consists in checking whether (1) the potential surrogate is associated with the final endpoint in individual patients and (2) the effect of treatment on the surrogate can be used to reliably predict the effect of treatment on the final endpoint. In some situations, condition (1) is fulfilled but condition (2) is not. We use concepts of causal inference to explain this apparently paradoxical situation, illustrating this review with 2 contrasting examples in operable breast cancer: the example of pathological complete response (pCR) and that of disease-free survival (DFS). In a previous meta-analysis, pCR has been shown to be a strong and independent prognostic factor for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) after neoadjuvant treatment of operable breast cancer. Yet, in randomized trials, the effects of experimental treatments on pCR have not translated into predictable effects on EFS or OS, making pCR an “individual-level” surrogate, but not a “trial-level” surrogate. In contrast, DFS has been shown to be an acceptable surrogate for OS at both the individual and trial levels in early, HER2-positive breast cancer. The distinction between the prognostic and predictive roles of a tentative surrogate, not always made in the literature, avoids unnecessary confusion and allows better understanding of what it takes to validate a surrogate endpoint that is truly able to replace a final endpoint.
Estimating the Propensity Score

Guido W. Imbens,Donald B. Rubin

2015-01-01

Abstract:INTRODUCTION Many of the procedures for estimating and assessing causal effects under unconfoundedness involve the propensity score. In practice it is rare that we know the propensity score a priori in settings other than those involving randomized experiments. Such practical settings could have complex designs where the unit-level probabilities differ in known ways. An example is the allocation of admissions to students applying for medical school in The Netherlands in the 1980s and 1990s. Based on high school grades, applicants would be assigned a priority score that determined their probability of getting admitted to medical school. The actual admission to medical school was then based on a (random) lottery. Such settings are rare, however, and a more common situation is where, given the pre-treatment variables available, a researcher views unconfoundedness as a reasonable approximation to the actual assignment mechanism, with only vague a priori information about the form of the dependence of the propensity score on the observed pre-treatment variables. For example, in many medical settings, decisions are based on a set of clinically relevant patient characteristics observed by doctors and entered in patients’ medical records. However, there is typically no explicit rule that requires physicians to choose a specific treatment based on particular values of the pre-treatment variables. In light of this degree of physician discretion, there is no explicitly known form for the propensity score. In such cases, for at least some of the methods for estimating and assessing treatment effects discussed in this part of the book, the researcher needs to estimate the propensity score. In this chapter we discuss some specific methods for doing so. It is important to note that the various methods that will be discussed in the chapters following this one, specifically Chapters 14–17, use the propensity score in different ways. Some of these methods rely more heavily than others on an accurate approximation of the true propensity score by the estimated propensity score.
The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects

Donald B. Rubin,P. Rosenbaum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/BIOMET/70.1.41

1983-04-01

Abstract:Abstract : The results of observational studies are often disputed because of nonrandom treatment assignment. For example, patients at greater risk may be overrepresented in some treatment group. This paper discusses the central role of propensity scores and balancing scores in the analysis of observational studies. The propensity score is the (estimated) conditional probability of assignment to a particular treatment given a vector of observed covariates. Both large and small sample theory show that adjustment for the scalar propensity score is sufficient to remove bias due to all observed covariates. Applications include: matched sampling on the univariate propensity score which is equal percent bias reducing under more general conditions than required for discriminant matching, multivariate adjustment by subclassification on balancing scores where the same subclasses are used to estimate treatment effects for all outcome variables and in all subpopulations, and visual representation of multivariate adjustment by a two-dimensional plot. (Author)

Mathematics,Economics,Business
Covariate-adjusted Survival Analyses in Propensity-Score Matched Samples: Imputing Potential Time-to-event Outcomes.

Peter C. Austin,Neal Thomas,Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280218817926

IF: 2.494

2018-01-01

Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Abstract:Matching on an estimated propensity score is frequently used to estimate the effects of treatments from observational data. Since the 1970s, different authors have proposed methods to combine matching at the design stage with regression adjustment at the analysis stage when estimating treatment effects for continuous outcomes. Previous work has consistently shown that the combination has generally superior statistical properties than either method by itself. In biomedical and epidemiological research, survival or time-to-event outcomes are common. We propose a method to combine regression adjustment and propensity score matching to estimate survival curves and hazard ratios based on estimating an imputed potential outcome under control for each successfully matched treated subject, which is accomplished using either an accelerated failure time parametric survival model or a Cox proportional hazard model that is fit to the matched control subjects. That is, a fitted model is then applied to the matched treated subjects to allow simulation of the missing potential outcome under control for each treated subject. Conventional survival analyses (e.g., estimation of survival curves and hazard ratios) can then be conducted using the observed outcome under treatment and the imputed outcome under control. We evaluated the repeated-sampling bias of the proposed methods using simulations. When using nearest neighbor matching, the proposed method resulted in decreased bias compared to crude analyses in the matched sample. We illustrate the method in an example prescribing beta-blockers at hospital discharge to patients hospitalized with heart failure.
High-dimensional propensity scores for empirical covariate selection in secondary database studies: Planning, implementation, and reporting

Jeremy A Rassen,Patrick Blin,Sebastian Kloss,Romain S Neugebauer,Robert W Platt,Anton Pottegård,Sebastian Schneeweiss,Sengwee Toh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5566

Abstract:Real-world evidence used for regulatory, payer, and clinical decision-making requires principled epidemiology in design and analysis, applying methods to minimize confounding given the lack of randomization. One technique to deal with potential confounding is propensity score (PS) analysis, which allows for the adjustment for measured preexposure covariates. Since its first publication in 2009, the high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) method has emerged as an approach that extends traditional PS covariate selection to include large numbers of covariates that may reduce confounding bias in the analysis of healthcare databases. hdPS is an automated, data-driven analytic approach for covariate selection that empirically identifies preexposure variables and proxies to include in the PS model. This article provides an overview of the hdPS approach and recommendations on the planning, implementation, and reporting of hdPS used for causal treatment-effect estimations in longitudinal healthcare databases. We supply a checklist with key considerations as a supportive decision tool to aid investigators in the implementation and transparent reporting of hdPS techniques, and to aid decision-makers unfamiliar with hdPS in the understanding and interpretation of studies employing this approach. This article is endorsed by the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology.
Sufficient conditions for concluding surrogacy based on observed data.

Zhenguo Wu,Ping He,Zhi Geng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4273

2011-01-01

Statistics in Medicine

Abstract:In this paper, we show that Prentice's criteria for surrogates can be strengthened to remedy some weaknesses of the criteria, and we also propose some sufficient conditions under which the treatment effects on a surrogate and on the true endpoint have qualitative implication and equivalence relations. With or without requiring Prentice's criteria, we discuss what conditions are required to qualitatively assess the causal effect of treatment on an unobserved endpoint in terms of an observed surrogate. Rather than a correlation between a surrogate and an endpoint, we require stricter measurements of association for the qualitative assessment. Further we show that these conditions can be satisfied by commonly used models, such as generalized linear models and Cox's proportional hazard models. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Propensity Score Adapted Covariate Selection for Causal Inference

Kangjie Zhou,Jinzhu Jia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.05155

2021-09-11

Abstract:In this paper, we propose a propensity score adapted variable selection procedure to select covariates for inclusion in propensity score models, in order to eliminate confounding bias and improve statistical efficiency in observational studies. Our variable selection approach is specially designed for causal inference, it only requires the propensity scores to be $\sqrt{n}$-consistently estimated through a parametric model and need not correct specification of potential outcome models. By using estimated propensity scores as inverse probability treatment weights in performing an adaptive lasso on the outcome, it successfully excludes instrumental variables, and includes confounders and outcome predictors. We show its oracle properties under the "linear association" conditions. We also perform some numerical simulations to illustrate our propensity score adapted covariate selection procedure and evaluate its performance under model misspecification. Comparison to other covariate selection methods is made using artificial data as well, through which we find that it is more powerful in excluding instrumental variables and spurious covariates.

Methodology
Penalized regression calibration: a method for the prediction of survival outcomes using complex longitudinal and high-dimensional data

Mirko Signorelli,Pietro Spitali,Cristina Al-Khalili Szigyarto,MARK-MD Consortium,Roula Tsonaka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.9178

2021-09-29

Abstract:Longitudinal and high-dimensional measurements have become increasingly common in biomedical research. However, methods to predict survival outcomes using covariates that are both longitudinal and high-dimensional are currently missing. In this article, we propose penalized regression calibration (PRC), a method that can be employed to predict survival in such situations. PRC comprises three modeling steps: First, the trajectories described by the longitudinal predictors are flexibly modeled through the specification of multivariate mixed effects models. Second, subject-specific summaries of the longitudinal trajectories are derived from the fitted mixed models. Third, the time to event outcome is predicted using the subject-specific summaries as covariates in a penalized Cox model. To ensure a proper internal validation of the fitted PRC models, we furthermore develop a cluster bootstrap optimism correction procedure that allows to correct for the optimistic bias of apparent measures of predictiveness. PRC and the CBOCP are implemented in the R package pencal, available from CRAN. After studying the behavior of PRC via simulations, we conclude by illustrating an application of PRC to data from an observational study that involved patients affected by Duchenne muscular dystrophy, where the goal is predict time to loss of ambulation using longitudinal blood biomarkers.

Methodology,Applications,Computation

Electrochemical analysis of endosulfan using a C18-modified carbon-paste electrode.

Propensity score analysis for time-dependent exposure

Calibrated and Conformal Propensity Scores for Causal Effect Estimation

Deep Learning-based Propensity Scores for Confounding Control in Comparative Effectiveness Research A Large-scale, Real-world Data Study

Propensity Score Method: a Non-Parametric Technique to Reduce Model Dependence

Using Propensity Scores to Estimate Effects of Treatment Initiation Decisions: State of the Science

Propensity score analysis with latent covariates: Measurement error bias correction using the covariate's posterior mean, aka the inclusive factor score

Propensity Score Analysis with Guaranteed Subgroup Balance

The Impact of Confounder Selection in Propensity Scores for Rare Events Data - with Applications to Birth Defects

Estimating generalized propensity scores with survey and attrition weighted data

[Application of Propensity Score Matching in the Design of an Epidemiological Study].

Incorporating baseline covariates to validate surrogate endpoints with a constant biomarker under control arm

Propensity Score Methods for Creating Covariate Balance in Observational Studies

Surrogacy Beyond Prognosis: The Importance of “Trial-Level” Surrogacy

Estimating the Propensity Score

The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects

Covariate-adjusted Survival Analyses in Propensity-Score Matched Samples: Imputing Potential Time-to-event Outcomes.

High-dimensional propensity scores for empirical covariate selection in secondary database studies: Planning, implementation, and reporting

Sufficient conditions for concluding surrogacy based on observed data.

Propensity Score Adapted Covariate Selection for Causal Inference

Penalized regression calibration: a method for the prediction of survival outcomes using complex longitudinal and high-dimensional data