ArticleStatistics in medicine2021
Borrowing from supplemental sources to estimate causal effects from a primary data source.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 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
- Bayesian Counterfactual Machine Learning Individualizes Radiation Modality Selection to Mitigate Immunosuppression.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Master Protocol Design With Hybrid Control for Efficient Early-Phase Trial Consolidation.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Adaptive Use of Co-Data Through Empirical Bayes for Bayesian Additive Regression Trees.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Semi-supervised mixture multi-source exchangeability model for leveraging real-world data in clinical trials.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- A Bayesian platform trial design with hybrid control based on multisource exchangeability modelling.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Data Integration in Causal Inference.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational statisticsArticle
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
The increasing multiplicity of data sources offers exciting possibilities in estimating the effects of a treatment, intervention, or exposure, particularly if observational and experimental sources could be used simultaneously. Borrowing between sources can potentially result in more efficient estimators, but it must be done in a principled manner to mitigate increased bias and Type I error. Furthermore, when the effect of treatment is confounded, as in observational sources or in clinical trials with noncompliance, causal effect estimators are needed to simultaneously adjust for confounding and to estimate effects across data sources. We consider the problem of estimating causal effects from a primary source and borrowing from any number of supplemental sources. We propose using regression-based estimators that borrow based on assuming exchangeability of the regression coefficients and parameters between data sources. Borrowing is accomplished with multisource exchangeability models and Bayesian model averaging. We show via simulation that a Bayesian linear model and Bayesian additive regression trees both have desirable properties and borrow under appropriate circumstances. We apply the estimators to recently completed trials of very low nicotine content cigarettes investigating their impact on smoking behavior.
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.