Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30774169›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Statistical Association2018

Interpretable Dynamic Treatment Regimes.

Yichi Zhang, Eric B Laber, Marie Davidian, Anastasios A Tsiatis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Machine Learning and Health Science Research: Tutorial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Learning and Predicting from Dynamic Models for COVID-19 Patient Monitoring.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Estimation and Optimization of Composite Outcomes.Journal of machine learning research : JMLR · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yichi ZhangDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard University.
Eric B LaberDepartment of Statistics, NC State University.
Marie DavidianDepartment of Statistics, NC State University.
Anastasios A TsiatisDepartment of Statistics, NC State University.

Funding

Statistical Methods for Cancer Clinical TrialsP01CA142538 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVIDIAN, MARIE, KOSOROK, MICHAEL R · 2010 to 2019
$21.3M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA142538
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precision medicine is currently a topic of great interest in clinical and intervention science. A key component of precision medicine is that it is evidence-based, i.e., data-driven, and consequently there has been tremendous interest in estimation of precision medicine strategies using observational or randomized study data. One way to formalize precision medicine is through a treatment regime, which is a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of clinical intervention, that map up-to-date patient information to a recommended treatment. An optimal treatment regime is defined as maximizing the mean of some cumulative clinical outcome if applied to a population of interest. It is well-known that even under simple generative models an optimal treatment regime can be a highly nonlinear function of patient information. Consequently, a focal point of recent methodological research has been the development of flexible models for estimating optimal treatment regimes. However, in many settings, estimation of an optimal treatment regime is an exploratory analysis intended to generate new hypotheses for subsequent research and not to directly dictate treatment to new patients. In such settings, an estimated treatment regime that is interpretable in a domain context may be of greater value than an unintelligible treatment regime built using 'black-box' estimation methods. We propose an estimator of an optimal treatment regime composed of a sequence of decision rules, each expressible as a list of "if-then" statements that can be presented as either a paragraph or as a simple flowchart that is immediately interpretable to domain experts. The discreteness of these lists precludes smooth, i.e., gradient-based, methods of estimation and leads to non-standard asymptotics. Nevertheless, we provide a computationally efficient estimation algorithm, prove consistency of the proposed estimator, and derive rates of convergence. We illustrate the proposed methods using a series of simulation examples and application to data from a sequential clinical trial on bipolar disorder.

Indexed as

decision listsinterpretabilityPrecision medicineresearch-practice gaptreatment regimestree-based methods

Identifiers

PMID30774169
PMCPMC6373443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.