Biometrics最新文献

To infer the treatment effect for a single treated unit using panel data, synthetic control (SC) methods construct a linear combination of control units' outcomes that mimics the treated unit's pre-treatment outcome trajectory. This linear combination is subsequently used to impute the counterfactual outcomes of the treated unit had it not been treated in the post-treatment period, and used to estimate the treatment effect. Existing SC methods rely on correctly modeling certain aspects of the counterfactual outcome generating mechanism and may require near-perfect matching of the pre-treatment trajectory. Inspired by proximal causal inference, we obtain two novel nonparametric identifying formulas for the average treatment effect for the treated unit: one is based on weighting, and the other combines models for the counterfactual outcome and the weighting function. We introduce the concept of covariate shift to SCs to obtain these identification results conditional on the treatment assignment. We also develop two treatment effect estimators based on these two formulas and generalized method of moments. One new estimator is doubly robust: it is consistent and asymptotically normal if at least one of the outcome and weighting models is correctly specified. We demonstrate the performance of the methods via simulations and apply them to evaluate the effectiveness of a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on the risk of all-cause pneumonia in Brazil.

Brain-effective connectivity analysis quantifies directed influence of one neural element or region over another, and it is of great scientific interest to understand how effective connectivity pattern is affected by variations of subject conditions. Vector autoregression (VAR) is a useful tool for this type of problems. However, there is a paucity of solutions when there is measurement error, when there are multiple subjects, and when the focus is the inference of the transition matrix. In this article, we study the problem of transition matrix inference under the high-dimensional VAR model with measurement error and multiple subjects. We propose a simultaneous testing procedure, with three key components: a modified expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm, a test statistic based on the tensor regression of a bias-corrected estimator of the lagged auto-covariance given the covariates, and a properly thresholded simultaneous test. We establish the uniform consistency for the estimators of our modified EM, and show that the subsequent test achieves both a consistent false discovery control, and its power approaches one asymptotically. We demonstrate the efficacy of our method through both simulations and a brain connectivity study of task-evoked functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Limitations of using the traditional Cox's hazard ratio for summarizing the magnitude of the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes have been widely discussed, and alternative measures that do not have such limitations are gaining attention. One of the alternative methods recently proposed, in a simple 2-sample comparison setting, uses the average hazard with survival weight (AH), which can be interpreted as the general censoring-free person-time incidence rate on a given time window. In this paper, we propose a new regression analysis approach for the AH with a truncation time τ. We investigate 3 versions of AH regression analysis, assuming (1) independent censoring, (2) group-specific censoring, and (3) covariate-dependent censoring. The proposed AH regression methods are closely related to robust Poisson regression. While the new approach needs to require a truncation time τ explicitly, it can be more robust than Poisson regression in the presence of censoring. With the AH regression approach, one can summarize the between-group treatment difference in both absolute difference and relative terms, adjusting for covariates that are associated with the outcome. This property will increase the likelihood that the treatment effect magnitude is correctly interpreted. The AH regression approach can be a useful alternative to the traditional Cox's hazard ratio approach for estimating and reporting the magnitude of the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes.

A crossover trial is an efficient trial design when there is no carry-over effect. To reduce the impact of the biological carry-over effect, a washout period is often designed. However, the carry-over effect remains an outstanding concern when a washout period is unethical or cannot sufficiently diminish the impact of the carry-over effect. The latter can occur in comparative effectiveness research, where the carry-over effect is often non-biological but behavioral. In this paper, we investigate the crossover design under a potential outcomes framework with and without the carry-over effect. We find that when the carry-over effect exists and satisfies a sign condition, the basic estimator underestimates the treatment effect, which does not inflate the type I error of one-sided tests but negatively impacts the power. This leads to a power trade-off between the crossover design and the parallel-group design, and we derive the condition under which the crossover design does not lead to type I error inflation and is still more powerful than the parallel-group design. We also develop covariate adjustment methods for crossover trials. We evaluate the performance of cross-over design and covariate adjustment using data from the MTN-034/REACH study.

A spatial sampling design determines where sample locations are placed in a study area so that population parameters can be estimated with relatively high precision. If the response variable has spatial trends, spatially balanced or well-spread designs give precise results for commonly used estimators. This article proposes a new method that draws well-spread samples over arbitrary auxiliary spaces and can be used for master sampling applications. All we require is a measure of the distance between population units. Numerical results show that the method generates well-spread samples and compares favorably with existing designs. We provide an example application using several auxiliary variables to estimate total aboveground biomass over a large study area in Eastern Amazonia, Brazil. Multipurpose surveys are also considered, where the totals of aboveground biomass, primary production, and clay content (3 responses) are estimated from a single well-spread sample over the auxiliary space.

Conventional supervised learning usually operates under the premise that data are collected from the same underlying population. However, challenges may arise when integrating new data from different populations, resulting in a phenomenon known as dataset shift. This paper focuses on prior probability shift, where the distribution of the outcome varies across datasets but the conditional distribution of features given the outcome remains the same. To tackle the challenges posed by such shift, we propose an estimation algorithm that can efficiently combine information from multiple sources. Unlike existing methods that are restricted to discrete outcomes, the proposed approach accommodates both discrete and continuous outcomes. It also handles high-dimensional covariate vectors through variable selection using an adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalty, producing efficient estimates that possess the oracle property. Moreover, a novel semiparametric likelihood ratio test is proposed to check the validity of prior probability shift assumptions by embedding the null conditional density function into Neyman's smooth alternatives (Neyman, 1937) and testing study-specific parameters. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method through extensive simulations and a real data example. The proposed methods serve as a useful addition to the repertoire of tools for dealing dataset shifts.

In many randomized placebo-controlled trials with a biomarker defined subgroup, it is believed that this subgroup has the same or higher treatment effect compared with its complement. These subgroups are often referred to as the biomarker positive and negative subgroups. Most biomarker-stratified pivotal trials are aimed at demonstrating a significant treatment effect either in the biomarker positive subgroup or in the overall population. A major shortcoming of this approach is that the treatment can be declared effective in the overall population even though it has no effect in the biomarker negative subgroup. We use the isotonic assumption about the treatment effects in the two subgroups to construct an efficient way to test for a treatment effect in both the biomarker positive and negative subgroups. A substantial reduction in the required sample size for such a trial compared with existing methods makes evaluating the treatment effect in both the biomarker positive and negative subgroups feasible in pivotal trials especially when the prevalence of the biomarker positive subgroup is less than 0.5.

We congratulate the authors for the new meta-analysis model that accounts for different outcomes. We discuss the modeling choice and the Bayesian setting, specifically, we point out the connection between the Bayesian hierarchical model and a mixed-effect model formulation to subsequently discuss possible future method extensions.