Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34295910›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in medicine2021

Big Data, Data Science, and Causal Inference: A Primer for Clinicians.

Yoshihiko Raita, Carlos A Camargo, Liming Liang, Kohei Hasegawa

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yoshihiko RaitaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Carlos A CamargoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Liming LiangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Kohei HasegawaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Massachusetts General Hospital · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Nasal microRNA during bronchiolitis and age 6y asthma phenotypes: MARC-35 cohortR01AI127507 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CAMARGO, CARLOS ARTURO, FREISHTAT, ROBERT J · 2017 to 2021
$8.0M
Host genetics, early-life microbiome, and childhood asthma: MARC-43 BostonUG3OD023253 · OD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CAMARGO, CARLOS ARTURO · 2016 to 2024
$6.8M
Airway dual-transcriptomics in bronchiolitis and risk of asthma: MARC-35 cohortR01AI137091 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HASEGAWA, KOHEI · 2018 to 2022
$4.3M
Airway metagenome & metabolome in bronchiolitis and risk of asthma: MARC-35 cohortR01AI134940 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HASEGAWA, KOHEI · 2018 to 2022
$4.0M
Infant blood epigenome and risks of IgE sensitization, obesity, and asthma: MARC-35/43 cohortsR01AI148338 · NIAID · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI CAMARGO, CARLOS ARTURO, LIANG, LIMING · 2020 to 2023
$2.5M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI127507NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI134940NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI137091NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI148338NIH HHS UG3 OD023253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinicians handle a growing amount of clinical, biometric, and biomarker data. In this "big data" era, there is an emerging faith that the answer to all clinical and scientific questions reside in "big data" and that data will transform medicine into precision medicine. However, data by themselves are useless. It is the algorithms encoding causal reasoning and domain (e.g., clinical and biological) knowledge that prove transformative. The recent introduction of (health) data science presents an opportunity to re-think this data-centric view. For example, while precision medicine seeks to provide the right prevention and treatment strategy to the right patients at the right time, its realization cannot be achieved by algorithms that operate exclusively in data-driven prediction modes, as do most machine learning algorithms. Better understanding of data science and its tasks is vital to interpret findings and translate new discoveries into clinical practice. In this review, we first discuss the principles and major tasks of data science by organizing it into three defining tasks: (1) association and prediction, (2) intervention, and (3) counterfactual causal inference. Second, we review commonly-used data science tools with examples in the medical literature. Lastly, we outline current challenges and future directions in the fields of medicine, elaborating on how data science can enhance clinical effectiveness and inform medical practice. As machine learning algorithms become ubiquitous tools to handle quantitatively "big data," their integration with causal reasoning and domain knowledge is instrumental to qualitatively transform medicine, which will, in turn, improve health outcomes of patients.

Indexed as

big datacausal inferencedata sciencemachine learningthe ladder of causation

Identifiers

PMID34295910
PMCPMC8290071
OpenAlexW3178048276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.