Basic concepts of statistical inference for causal effects in experiments and observational studies

Donald B Rubin

2003-01-01

Abstract:The perspective on causal inference taken in this course is often referred to as the “Rubin Causal Model”(eg, Holland, 1986) to distinguish it from other commonly used perspectives such as those based on regression or relative risk models. Three primary features distinguish the Rubin Causal Model:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Statistics and Causal Inference

Paul W. Holland

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1986.10478354

IF: 4.369

1986-12-01

Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract:Problems involving causal inference have dogged at the heels of statistics since its earliest days. Correlation does not imply causation, and yet causal conclusions drawn from a carefully designed experiment are often valid. What can a statistical model say about causation? This question is addressed by using a particular model for causal inference (Holland and Rubin 1983; Rubin 1974) to critique the discussions of other writers on causation and causal inference. These include selected philosophers, medical researchers, statisticians, econometricians, and proponents of causal modeling.

statistics & probability
Statistical Inference For Causal Effects, With Emphasis On Applications In Epidemiology And Medical Statistics

Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7161(07)27002-6

2008-01-01

Abstract:A central problem in epidemiology and medical statistics is how to draw inferences about the causal effects of treatments (i.e., interventions) from randomized and nonrandomized data. For example, does the new drug really reduce heart disease, or does exposure to that chemical in drinking water increase cancer rates relative to drinking water without that chemical? This chapter provides an overview of the approach to the estimation of such causal effects based on the concept of potential outcomes. We discuss randomization-based approaches and the Bayesian posterior predictive approach.
Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: an Introduction

Guido W. Imbens,Donald B. Rubin

2015-01-01

Abstract:Most questions in social and biomedical sciences are causal in nature: what would happen to individuals, or to groups, if part of their environment were changed? In this groundbreaking text, two world-renowned experts present statistical methods for studying such questions. This book starts with the notion of potential outcomes, each corresponding to the outcome that would be realized if a subject were exposed to a particular treatment or regime. In this approach, causal effects are comparisons of such potential outcomes. The fundamental problem of causal inference is that we can only observe one of the potential outcomes for a particular subject. The authors discuss how randomized experiments allow us to assess causal effects and then turn to observational studies. They lay out the assumptions needed for causal inference and describe the leading analysis methods, including, matching, propensity-score methods, and instrumental variables. Many detailed applications are included, with special focus on practical aspects for the empirical researcher.
Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects

Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7161(05)25001-0

2005-01-01

Handbook of Statistics

Abstract:A central problem in statistics is how to draw inferences about the causal effects of treatments (i.e., interventions) from randomized and nonrandomized data. For example, does the new job-training program really improve the quality of jobs for those trained, or does exposure to that chemical in drinking water increase cancer rates? This presentation provides a brief overview of the Bayesian approach to the estimation of such causal effects based on the concept of potential outcomes.
Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects: the Role of Randomization

DB RUBIN

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344064

1978-01-01

Abstract:Causal effects are comparisons among values that would have been observed under all possible assignments of treatments to experimental units. In an experiment, one assignment of treatments is chosen and only the values under that assignment can be observed. Bayesian inference for causal effects follows from finding the predictive distribution of the values under the other assignments of treatments. This perspective makes clear the role of mechanisms that sample experimental units, assign treatments and record data. Unless these mechanisms are ignorable (known probabilistic functions of recorded values), the Bayesian must model them in the data analysis and, consequently, confront inferences for causal effects that are sensitive to the specification of the prior distribution of the data. Moreover, not all ignorable mechanisms can yield data from which inferences for causal effects are insensitive to prior specifications. Classical randomized designs stand out as especially appealing assignment mechanisms designed to make inference for causal effects straightforward by limiting the sensitivity of a valid Bayesian analysis.
Essential Concepts of Causal Inference: a Remarkable History and an Intriguing Future

Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24709360.2019.1670513

2019-01-01

Abstract:Causal inference refers to the process of inferring what would happen in the future if we change what we are doing, or inferring what would have happened in the past, if we had done something different in the distant past. Humans adjust our behaviors by anticipating what will happen if we act in different ways, using past experiences to inform these choices. 'Essential' here means in the mathematical sense of excluding the unnecessary and including only the necessary, e.g. stating that the Pythagorean theorem works for an isosceles right triangle is bad mathematics because it includes the unnecessary adjective isosceles; of course this is not as bad as omitting the adjective 'right.' I find much of what is written about causal inference to be mathematically inapposite in one of these senses because the descriptions either include irrelevant clutter or omit conditions required for the correctness of the assertions. The history of formal causal inference is remarkable because its correct formulation is so recent, a twentieth century phenomenon, and its future is intriguing because it is currently undeveloped when applied to investigate interventions applied to conscious humans, and moreover will utilize tools impossible without modern computing.
Practical Implications of Modes of Statistical Inference for Causal Effects and the Critical Role of the Assignment Mechanism

DB Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511810725.033

2006-01-01

Abstract:Causal inference in an important topic and one that is now attracting serious attention of statisticians. Although there exist recent discussions concerning the general definition of causal effects and a substantial literature on specific techniques for the analysis of data in randomized and nonrandomized studies, there has been relatively little discussion of modes of statistical inference for causal effects. This presentation briefly describes and contrasts four basic modes of statistical inference for causal effects, emphasizes the common underlying causal framework with a posited assignment mechanism, and describes practical implications in the context of an example involving the effects of switching from a name-band to a generic drug. A fundamental conclusion is that in such nonrandomized studies, sensitivity of inference to the assignment mechanism is the dominant issue, and it cannot be avoided by changing modes of inference, for instance, by changing from randomization-based to Bayesian methods.
An Introduction to Causal Discovery

Martin Huber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.08602

2024-07-11

Abstract:In social sciences and economics, causal inference traditionally focuses on assessing the impact of predefined treatments (or interventions) on predefined outcomes, such as the effect of education programs on earnings. Causal discovery, in contrast, aims to uncover causal relationships among multiple variables in a data-driven manner, by investigating statistical associations rather than relying on predefined causal structures. This approach, more common in computer science, seeks to understand causality in an entire system of variables, which can be visualized by causal graphs. This survey provides an introduction to key concepts, algorithms, and applications of causal discovery from the perspectives of economics and social sciences. It covers fundamental concepts like d-separation, causal faithfulness, and Markov equivalence, sketches various algorithms for causal discovery, and discusses the back-door and front-door criteria for identifying causal effects. The survey concludes with more specific examples of causal discovery, e.g. for learning all variables that directly affect an outcome of interest and/or testing identification of causal effects in observational data.

Econometrics
24 Statistical Inference for Causal Effects, with Emphasis on Applications in Psychometrics and Education

Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-7161(06)26024-3

2007-01-01

Abstract:A central problem in statistics, psychometrics and education, is how to draw inferences about the causal effects of treatments (i.e., interventions) from randomized and nonrandomized data. For example, does the new job-training program really improve the quality of jobs for those trained relative to the jobs they would get without training, or does exposure to that chemical in drinking water increase cancer rates relative to drinking water without that chemical, or, of particular relevance in this volume, does that educational intervention improve the test scores of students relative to the standard program? This presentation provides an overview of the approach to the estimation of such causal effects based on the concept of potential outcomes, including a relatively detailed presentation of the Bayesian approach.
Estimating causal effects of treatments in experimental and observational studies

Donald Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1972.tb00631.x

1972-01-01

ETS Research Bulletin Series

Abstract:ABSTRACT A discussion of matching, randomization, random sampling, and other methods of controlling extraneous variation is presented. The objective is to specify the benefits of randomization in estimating causal effects of treatments. The basic conclusion is that randomization should be employed whenever possible, but the use of carefully controlled nonrandomized data to estimate causal effects is a reasonable and necessary procedure in many cases.
What Would It Take to Change an Inference? Using Rubin’s Causal Model to Interpret the Robustness of Causal Inferences

Kenneth A. Frank,Spiro J. Maroulis,Minh Q. Duong,Benjamin M. Kelcey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373713493129

2013-12-01

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Abstract:We contribute to debate about causal inferences in educational research in two ways. First, we quantify how much bias there must be in an estimate to invalidate an inference. Second, we utilize Rubin’s causal model to interpret the bias necessary to invalidate an inference in terms of sample replacement. We apply our analysis to an inference of a positive effect of Open Court Curriculum on reading achievement from a randomized experiment, and an inference of a negative effect of kindergarten retention on reading achievement from an observational study. We consider details of our framework, and then discuss how our approach informs judgment of inference relative to study design. We conclude with implications for scientific discourse.

education & educational research
Causal effects in clinical and epidemiological studies via potential outcomes: concepts and analytical approaches.

Roderick J. Little,Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.121

IF: 21.87

2003-01-01

Annual Review of Public Health

Abstract:A central problem in public health studies is how to make inferences about the causal effects of treatments or agents, In this article we review an approach to making such inferences via potential outcomes. In this approach, the causal effect is defined as a comparison of results from two or more alternative treatments, with only one of the results actually observed. We discuss the application of this approach to a number of data collection designs and associated problems commonly encountered in clinical research and epidemiology. Topics considered include the fundamental role of the assignment mechanism, in particular the importance of randomization as an unconfounded method of assignment; randomization-based and model-based methods of statistical inference for causal effects; methods for handling noncompliance and missing data; and methods for limiting bias in the analysis of observational data, including propensity score matching and sensitivity analysis.
For Objective Causal Inference, Design Trumps Analysis

Donald B. Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/08-aoas187

2008-01-01

Abstract:For obtaining causal inferences that are objective, and therefore have the best chance of revealing scientific truths, carefully designed and executed randomized experiments are generally considered to be the gold standard. Observational studies, in contrast, are generally fraught with problems that compromise any claim for objectivity of the resulting causal inferences. The thesis here is that observational studies have to be carefully designed to approximate randomized experiments, in particular, without examining any final outcome data. Often a candidate data set will have to be rejected as inadequate because of lack of data on key covariates, or because of lack of overlap in the distributions of key covariates between treatment and control groups, often revealed by careful propensity score analyses. Sometimes the template for the approximating randomized experiment will have to be altered, and the use of principal stratification can be helpful in doing this. These issues are discussed and illustrated using the framework of potential outcomes to define causal effects, which greatly clarifies critical issues.
Causal inference: critical developments, past and future

Erica EM Moodie,David A Stephens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.02231

2022-04-05

Abstract:Causality is a subject of philosophical debate and a central scientific issue with a long history. In the statistical domain, the study of cause and effect based on the notion of `fairness' in comparisons dates back several hundred years, and yet statistical concepts and developments that form the area of causal inference are only decades old. In this paper, we review core tenets and methods of causal inference and key developments in the history of the field. We highlight connections with traditional `associational' statistical methods, including estimating equations and semiparametric theory, and point to current topics of active research in this crucial area of our field.

Other Statistics
Causality without potential outcomes and the dynamic approach

Daniel Commenges

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.01195

2019-05-03

Abstract:Several approaches to causal inference from observational studies have been proposed. Since the proposal of Rubin (1974) many works have developed a counterfactual approach to causality, statistically formalized by potential outcomes. Pearl (2000) has put forward a theory of structural causal models which gives an important role to graphical models and do not necessarily use potential outcomes. On the other hand, several authors have developed a dynamical approach in line with Granger (1969). We analyze prospective and retrospective causal questions and their different modalities. Following Dawid (2000) we develop criticisms about the potential outcome approach and we show that causal effects can be estimated without potential outcomes: in particular direct computation of the marginal effect can be done by a change of probability measure. Finally, we highlight the need to adopt a dynamic approach to causality through two examples, "truncation by death" and the "obesity paradox".

Methodology
Statistical Approaches for Causal Inference

Miao Wang,Liu Chunchen,Geng Zhi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1360/n012018-00055

2018-01-01

Scientia Sinica Mathematica

Abstract:Causal inference is a permanent challenge topic in statistics, data science, and many other scientific fields.In this paper, we give an overview of statistical methods for causal inference. There are two main frameworks of causal inference: the potential outcome model and the causal network model. The potential outcome framework is used to evaluate causal effects of a known treatment or exposure variable on a given response or outcome variable. We review several commonly-used approaches in this framework for causal effect evaluation.The causal network framework is used to depict causal relationships among variables and the data generation mechanism in complex systems.We review two main approaches for structural learning: the constraint-based method and the score-based method.In the recent years, the evaluation of causal effects and the structural learning of causal networks are combined together.At the first stage, the hybrid approach learns a Markov equivalent class of causal networks from observed data;then at the second stage, it evaluates the causal effect for each causal network in the class; it also obtains a set of causal effects.The current frameworks of causal inference still have various demerits and disadvantages.We discuss these challenges and possible solutions in modern big data studies.
Causality and Statistical Learning

Andrew Gelman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1003.2619

2010-03-13

Abstract:We review some approaches and philosophies of causal inference coming from sociology, economics, computer science, cognitive science, and statistics

Statistics Theory,Methodology
Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes

Donald B Rubin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001880

IF: 4.369

2005-01-01

Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract:Causal effects are defined as comparisons of potential outcomes under different treatments on a common set of units. Observed values of the potential outcomes are revealed by the assignment mechanism—a probabilistic model for the treatment each unit receives as a function of covariates and potential outcomes. Fisher made tremendous contributions to causal inference through his work on the design of randomized experiments, but the potential outcomes perspective applies to other complex experiments and nonrandomized studies as well. As noted by Kempthorne in his 1976 discussion of Savage's Fisher lecture, Fisher never bridged his work on experimental design and his work on parametric modeling, a bridge that appears nearly automatic with an appropriate view of the potential outcomes framework, where the potential outcomes and covariates are given a Bayesian distribution to complete the model specification. Also, this framework crisply separates scientific inference for causal effects and decisions based on such inference, a distinction evident in Fisher's discussion of tests of significance versus tests in an accept/reject framework. But Fisher never used the potential outcomes framework, originally proposed by Neyman in the context of randomized experiments, and as a result he provided generally flawed advice concerning the use of the analysis of covariance to adjust for posttreatment concomitants in randomized trials.
Distinguishing Between Mediators and Confounders is Important for the Causal Inference in Observational Studies

Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/amj.2019.09.03

2019-01-01

AME Medical Journal

Abstract:Observational studies are common in clinical literature because they are less costly and easy to perform, as compared to the randomized controlled trials (RCT). The limitation of such kind of studies is their inability to draw a causal inference due to potential bias. However, there are many approaches being proposed in recent years for the causal inference in observational studies (1-3). Although these methods cannot replace RCTs for causal inference, analysis in their framework can help to make the causal evidence more reliable. In the following discuss, I would like to discuss some of these points by using a published article.
Causal inference and observational data

Ivan Olier,Yiqiang Zhan,Xiaoyu Liang,Victor Volovici

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-023-02058-5

2023-10-12

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Abstract:Observational studies using causal inference frameworks can provide a feasible alternative to randomized controlled trials. Advances in statistics, machine learning, and access to big data facilitate unraveling complex causal relationships from observational data across healthcare, social sciences, and other fields. However, challenges like evaluating models and bias amplification remain.

health care sciences & services

Basic concepts of statistical inference for causal effects in experiments and observational studies

Statistics and Causal Inference

Statistical Inference For Causal Effects, With Emphasis On Applications In Epidemiology And Medical Statistics

Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: an Introduction

Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects

Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects: the Role of Randomization

Essential Concepts of Causal Inference: a Remarkable History and an Intriguing Future

Practical Implications of Modes of Statistical Inference for Causal Effects and the Critical Role of the Assignment Mechanism

An Introduction to Causal Discovery

24 Statistical Inference for Causal Effects, with Emphasis on Applications in Psychometrics and Education

Estimating causal effects of treatments in experimental and observational studies

What Would It Take to Change an Inference? Using Rubin’s Causal Model to Interpret the Robustness of Causal Inferences

Causal effects in clinical and epidemiological studies via potential outcomes: concepts and analytical approaches.

For Objective Causal Inference, Design Trumps Analysis

Causal inference: critical developments, past and future

Causality without potential outcomes and the dynamic approach

Statistical Approaches for Causal Inference

Causality and Statistical Learning

Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes

Distinguishing Between Mediators and Confounders is Important for the Causal Inference in Observational Studies

Causal inference and observational data