ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2020
Variable selection and estimation in causal inference using Bayesian spike and slab priors.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparative approach to analyzing and forecasting carbon dioxide emissions in ethiopia using Bayesian autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) and Bayesian structural time series (BSTS) models.Carbon balance and management · 2026Article
- AteMeVs: An R package for the estimation of the average treatment effect with measurement error and variable selection for confounders.PloS one · 2024Article
- Estimation of the average treatment effect with variable selection and measurement error simultaneously addressed for potential confounders.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Article
- Synthetic Negative Controls: Using Simulation to Screen Large-scale Propensity Score Analyses.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022Article
- Assessing Clinical Effects of Traditional Chinese Medicine Interventions: Moving Beyond Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Unbiased estimation of causal effects with observational data requires adjustment for confounding variables that are related to both the outcome and treatment assignment. Standard variable selection techniques aim to maximize predictive ability of the outcome model, but they ignore covariate associations with treatment and may not adjust for important confounders weakly associated to outcome. We propose a novel method for estimating causal effects that simultaneously considers models for both outcome and treatment, which we call the bilevel spike and slab causal estimator (BSSCE). By using a Bayesian formulation, BSSCE estimates the posterior distribution of all model parameters and provides straightforward and reliable inference. Spike and slab priors are used on each covariate coefficient which aim to minimize the mean squared error of the treatment effect estimator. Theoretical properties of the treatment effect estimator are derived justifying the prior used in BSSCE. Simulations show that BSSCE can substantially reduce mean squared error over numerous methods and performs especially well with large numbers of covariates, including situations where the number of covariates is greater than the sample size. We illustrate BSSCE by estimating the causal effect of vasoactive therapy vs. fluid resuscitation on hypotensive episode length for patients in the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care III critical care database.
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.