ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2016
Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research.
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Causal AI in Cardiac Arrhythmia: From Pattern Recognition to Mechanistic Insight.Clinical cardiology · 2026Review
- Performance of Cross-Validated Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- How Effective Are Machine Learning and Doubly Robust Estimators in Incorporating High-Dimensional Proxies to Reduce Residual Confounding?Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Article
- Guidelines and Best Practices for the Use of Targeted Maximum Likelihood and Machine Learning When Estimating Causal Effects of Exposures on Time-To-Event Outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Data-driven simulations to assess the impact of study imperfections in time-to-event analyses.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Machine learning in causal inference for epidemiology.European journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Association of Premorbid GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i Prescription Alone and in Combination with COVID-19 Severity.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024Article
- Implementing TMLE in the presence of a continuous outcome.Research methods in medicine & health sciences · 2024Article
- Transfering Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Causal Inference into Sports Science.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Association Between Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Use and COVID-19 Outcomes.Diabetes care · 2021Article
- Building a framework for the evaluation of knowledge translation for the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2020Article
- Targeted maximum likelihood estimation for a binary treatment: A tutorial.Statistics in medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTargeted maximum likelihood estimation has been proposed for estimating marginal causal effects, and is robust to misspecification of either the treatment or outcome model. However, due perhaps to its novelty, targeted maximum likelihood estimation has not been widely used in pharmacoepidemiology. The objective of this study was to demonstrate targeted maximum likelihood estimation in a pharmacoepidemiological study with a high-dimensional covariate space, to incorporate the use of high-dimensional propensity scores into this method, and to compare the results to those of inverse probability weighting.
methodsWe implemented the targeted maximum likelihood estimation procedure in a single-point exposure study of the use of statins and the 1-year risk of all-cause mortality postmyocardial infarction using data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. A range of known potential confounders were considered, and empirical covariates were selected using the high-dimensional propensity scores algorithm. We estimated odds ratios using targeted maximum likelihood estimation and inverse probability weighting with a variety of covariate selection strategies.
resultsThrough a real example, we demonstrated the double robustness of targeted maximum likelihood estimation. We showed that results with this method and inverse probability weighting differed when a large number of covariates were included in the treatment model.
conclusionsTargeted maximum likelihood can be used in high-dimensional covariate settings. In high-dimensional covariate settings, differences in results between targeted maximum likelihood and inverse probability weighted estimation are likely due to sensitivity to (near) positivity violations. Further investigations are needed to gain better understanding of the advantages and limitations of this method in pharmacoepidemiological studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.