Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35611438›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2022

Handling parametric assumptions in principal causal effect estimation using Gaussian mixtures.

Booil Jo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Booil JoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8855-147X

Funding

A Pragmatic Latent Variable Learning Approach Aligned with Clinical PracticeR01MH123443 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI JO, BOOIL · 2020 to 2022
$1.7M
Heterogeneity in Prevention Intervention Effects On Substance Use: A Latent VariaR01DA031698 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI JO, BOOIL · 2012 to 2014
$652k
NIDA NIH HHS DA031698NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA031698NIMH NIH HHS MH123443NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH123443
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the latent stratum membership, principal stratification models with continuous outcomes naturally fit in the parametric estimation framework of Gaussian mixtures. However, with models that are not nonparametrically identified, relying on parametric mixture modeling has been mostly discouraged as a way of identifying principal effects. This study revisits this rather deserted use of parametric mixture modeling, which may open up various possibilities in principal stratification modeling. The main problem with using the parametric mixture modeling approach is that it is hard to assess the quality of principal effect estimates given its reliance on parametric conditions. As a way of assessing the estimation quality in this situation, this study proposes that we use parametric mixture modeling in two different ways, with and without the assurance of nonparametric identification. The key identifying assumption employed in this study is the moving exclusion restriction, a flexible version of the standard exclusion restriction assumption. This assumption is used as a temporary vehicle to help assess the quality of principal effect estimates obtained relying on parametric mixture modeling. The study presents promising results, showing the possibility of using parametric mixture modeling as an accessible tool for causal inference.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalCausalityHumansNormal Distributioncausal inferenceGaussian mixturesmoving exclusion restrictionnonparametric identificationparametric mixture modelingprincipal stratification

Identifiers

PMID35611438
PMCPMC9232942

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.