ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Algorithm Selection for Estimating Causal Effects: Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers to Be.
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Routine health checkups and cognitive resilience among older survivors of the 2011 Japan Tsunami.npj natural hazards · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe Super Learner is an ensemble learning method that has been widely used with doubly robust causal effect estimators. It is recommended to deploy the Super Learner with a diverse library of algorithms. To our knowledge, however, the magnitude of the improvements gained by including many algorithms has not yet been systematically evaluated in common epidemiologic research settings.
methodsWe applied Super Learning with two doubly robust estimators, augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) and targeted minimum loss-based estimation (TMLE), to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of high periconceptional dietary fruit and vegetable density on the risk of preeclampsia among 7,923 women from the nuMoM2b study. Using a reference ensemble with a diverse library of algorithms, we compared estimates under different sets of algorithms included in the Super Learner to evaluate whether ATE estimates were sensitive to library choices.
resultsThe doubly robust estimators fitted with the reference Super Learner ensemble suggested ≥2.5 cups/1,000 kcal of total fruit and vegetable density was associated with a lower risk of preeclampsia. ATE estimated on the risk difference scale by AIPW was -0.019 (95% confidence interval = -0.036, -0.003) and by TMLE was -0.023 (95% confidence interval = -0.039, -0.007). Excluding any individual algorithm from the reference ensemble had little impact on estimates from either AIPW or TMLE. However, relying on a single algorithm (e.g., extreme gradient boosting) yielded results that were much more variable.
conclusionOur empirical findings support recommendations to build ensemble learners for doubly robust estimators using a diverse array of flexible machine learning algorithms.
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.