ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Is Checking for Sequential Positivity Violations Getting You Down? Try sPoRT!
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSequential positivity is often a necessary assumption for drawing causal inferences, such as through marginal structural modeling. Unfortunately, verification of this assumption can be challenging because it usually relies on multiple parametric propensity score models, unlikely to all be correctly specified. Therefore, we propose a new algorithm, called sequential Positivity Regression Tree (sPoRT), to overcome this issue and identify the subgroups found to be violating this assumption, allowing for insights about the nature of the violations and potential solutions.
methodsWe present different versions of sPoRT based on either stratifying or pooling over time under static or dynamic treatment strategies. This methodologic development was motivated by a real-life application of the impact of the timing of initiation of HIV treatment with and without smoothing over time, which we also use to demonstrate the method.
resultsThe illustration of sPoRT demonstrates its easy use and the interpretability of the results for applied epidemiologists. Furthermore, an R notebook showing how to use sPoRT in practice is available at github.com/ArthurChatton/sPoRT-notebook.
conclusionsThe sPoRT algorithm provides interpretable subgroups violating the sequential positivity violation, allowing patterns and trends in the confounders to be easily identified. We finally provided practical implications and recommendations when positivity violations are identified.
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.