ArticleBernoulli : official journal of the Bernoulli Society for Mathematical Statistics and Probability2025
Data fusion methods for the heterogeneity of treatment effect and confounding function.
Article in Bernoulli : official journal of the Bernoulli Society for Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data Fusion for Partial Identification of Causal Effects.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2025Article
- Data fusion methods for the heterogeneity of treatment effect and confounding function.Bernoulli : official journal of the Bernoulli Society for Mathematical Statistics and Probability · 2025Article
- Statistical inference for heterogeneous treatment effect with right-censored data from synthesizing randomized clinical trials and real-world data.Biometrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) lies at the heart of precision medicine. Randomized controlled trials are gold-standard for treatment effect estimation but are typically underpowered for heterogeneous effects. In contrast, large observational studies have high predictive power but are often confounded due to the lack of randomization of treatment. We show that the observational study, even subject to hidden confounding, may be used to empower trials in estimating the HTE using the notion of confounding function. The confounding function summarizes the impact of unmeasured confounders on the difference between the observed treatment effect and the causal treatment effect, given the observed covariates, which is unidentifiable based only on the observational study. Coupling the trial and observational study, we show that the HTE and confounding function are identifiable. We then derive the semiparametric efficient scores and the integrative estimators of the HTE and confounding function. We clarify the conditions under which the integrative estimator of the HTE is strictly more efficient than the trial estimator. Finally, we illustrate the integrative estimators via simulation and an application.
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.