ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2017
A Bayesian nonparametric approach to marginal structural models for point treatments and a continuous or survival outcome.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bayesian semi-parametric approach to causal mediation for longitudinal mediators and time-to-event outcomes with application to a cardiovascular disease cohort study.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- causalBETA: An R Package for Bayesian Semiparametric Causal Inference with Event-Time Outcomes.Observational studies · 2025Article
- Bayesian Nonparametric Model for Heterogeneous Treatment Effects With Zero-Inflated Data.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- A BAYESIAN MACHINE LEARNING APPROACH FOR ESTIMATING HETEROGENEOUS SURVIVOR CAUSAL EFFECTS: APPLICATIONS TO A CRITICAL CARE TRIAL.The annals of applied statistics · 2024Article
- A comparison of covariate adjustment approaches under model misspecification in individually randomized trials.Trials · 2023Article
- Sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding in causal inference based on exponential tilting and super learner.Journal of applied statistics · 2023Article
- A flexible approach for causal inference with multiple treatments and clustered survival outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- A practical introduction to Bayesian estimation of causal effects: Parametric and nonparametric approaches.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- A note on compatibility for inference with missing data in the presence of auxiliary covariates.Statistics in medicine · 2019Article
- Discussion of PENCOMP.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2019Article
- Bayesian nonparametric generative models for causal inference with missing at random covariates.Biometrics · 2018Article
- Norepinephrine Administration Is Associated with Higher Mortality in Dialysis Requiring Acute Kidney Injury Patients with Septic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2018Article
- Bayesian Approaches for Missing Not at Random Outcome Data: The Role of Identifying Restrictions.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Marginal structural models (MSMs) are a general class of causal models for specifying the average effect of treatment on an outcome. These models can accommodate discrete or continuous treatments, as well as treatment effect heterogeneity (causal effect modification). The literature on estimation of MSM parameters has been dominated by semiparametric estimation methods, such as inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW). Likelihood-based methods have received little development, probably in part due to the need to integrate out confounders from the likelihood and due to reluctance to make parametric modeling assumptions. In this article we develop a fully Bayesian MSM for continuous and survival outcomes. In particular, we take a Bayesian nonparametric (BNP) approach, using a combination of a dependent Dirichlet process and Gaussian process to model the observed data. The BNP approach, like semiparametric methods such as IPTW, does not require specifying a parametric outcome distribution. Moreover, by using a likelihood-based method, there are potential gains in efficiency over semiparametric methods. An additional advantage of taking a fully Bayesian approach is the ability to account for uncertainty in our (uncheckable) identifying assumption. To this end, we propose informative prior distributions that can be used to capture uncertainty about the identifying "no unmeasured confounders" assumption. Thus, posterior inference about the causal effect parameters can reflect the degree of uncertainty about this assumption. The performance of the methodology is evaluated in several simulation studies. The results show substantial efficiency gains over semiparametric methods, and very little efficiency loss over correctly specified maximum likelihood estimates. The method is also applied to data from a study on neurocognitive performance in HIV-infected women and a study of the comparative effectiveness of antihypertensive drug classes.
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.