ArticleProceedings of machine learning research2025
Stabilized Inverse Probability Weighting via Isotonic Calibration.
Article in Proceedings of machine learning research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A review and evaluation of doubly robust approaches for estimating average treatment effects.Behavior research methods · 2026Review
- Modern Causal Inference Approaches to Improve Power for Subgroup Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials.Statistics in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Inverse weighting with an estimated propensity score is widely used by estimation methods in causal inference to adjust for confounding bias. However, directly inverting propensity score estimates can lead to instability, bias, and excessive variability due to large inverse weights, especially when treatment overlap is limited. In this work, we propose a post-hoc calibration algorithm for inverse propensity weights that generates well-calibrated, stabilized weights from user-supplied, cross-fitted propensity score estimates. Our approach employs a variant of isotonic regression with a loss function specifically tailored to the inverse propensity weights. Through theoretical analysis and empirical studies, we demonstrate that isotonic calibration improves the performance of doubly robust estimators of the average treatment effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41958837PMC13061341What 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.