近端因果学习导论

E. T. Tchetgen, Andrew Ying, Yifan Cui, Xu Shi, Wang Miao
{"title":"近端因果学习导论","authors":"E. T. Tchetgen, Andrew Ying, Yifan Cui, Xu Shi, Wang Miao","doi":"10.1101/2020.09.21.20198762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A standard assumption for causal inference from observational data is that one has measured a sufficiently rich set of covariates to ensure that within covariate strata, subjects are exchangeable across observed treatment values. Skepticism about the exchangeability assumption in observational studies is often warranted because it hinges on investigators' ability to accurately measure covariates capturing all potential sources of confounding. Realistically, confounding mechanisms can rarely if ever, be learned with certainty from measured covariates. One can therefore only ever hope that covariate measurements are at best proxies of true underlying confounding mechanisms operating in an observational study, thus invalidating causal claims made on basis of standard exchangeability conditions. Causal learning from proxies is a challenging inverse problem which has to date remained unresolved. In this paper, we introduce a formal potential outcome framework for proximal causal learning, which while explicitly acknowledging covariate measurements as imperfect proxies of confounding mechanisms, offers an opportunity to learn about causal effects in settings where exchangeability on the basis of measured covariates fails. Sufficient conditions for nonparametric identification are given, leading to the proximal g-formula and corresponding proximal g-computation algorithm for estimation. These may be viewed as generalizations of Robins' foundational g-formula and g-computation algorithm, which account explicitly for bias due to unmeasured confounding. Both point treatment and time-varying treatment settings are considered, and an application of proximal g-computation of causal effects is given for illustration.","PeriodicalId":186390,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Methodology","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"116","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Introduction to Proximal Causal Learning\",\"authors\":\"E. T. Tchetgen, Andrew Ying, Yifan Cui, Xu Shi, Wang Miao\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2020.09.21.20198762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A standard assumption for causal inference from observational data is that one has measured a sufficiently rich set of covariates to ensure that within covariate strata, subjects are exchangeable across observed treatment values. Skepticism about the exchangeability assumption in observational studies is often warranted because it hinges on investigators' ability to accurately measure covariates capturing all potential sources of confounding. Realistically, confounding mechanisms can rarely if ever, be learned with certainty from measured covariates. One can therefore only ever hope that covariate measurements are at best proxies of true underlying confounding mechanisms operating in an observational study, thus invalidating causal claims made on basis of standard exchangeability conditions. Causal learning from proxies is a challenging inverse problem which has to date remained unresolved. In this paper, we introduce a formal potential outcome framework for proximal causal learning, which while explicitly acknowledging covariate measurements as imperfect proxies of confounding mechanisms, offers an opportunity to learn about causal effects in settings where exchangeability on the basis of measured covariates fails. Sufficient conditions for nonparametric identification are given, leading to the proximal g-formula and corresponding proximal g-computation algorithm for estimation. These may be viewed as generalizations of Robins' foundational g-formula and g-computation algorithm, which account explicitly for bias due to unmeasured confounding. Both point treatment and time-varying treatment settings are considered, and an application of proximal g-computation of causal effects is given for illustration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":186390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv: Methodology\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"116\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv: Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.21.20198762\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.21.20198762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 116

摘要

从观测数据进行因果推断的一个标准假设是,人们已经测量了足够丰富的协变量集,以确保在协变量层内,受试者在观察到的处理值之间是可交换的。观察性研究中对互换性假设的怀疑通常是有根据的,因为它取决于研究者准确测量协变量的能力,这些协变量捕获了所有潜在的混淆源。实际上,混淆机制很少(如果有的话)可以从测量的协变量中确定地了解到。因此,人们只能希望协变量测量充其量只能代表观察性研究中运行的真正潜在混淆机制,从而使基于标准互换性条件的因果断言无效。从代理中进行因果学习是一个具有挑战性的逆向问题,至今仍未得到解决。在本文中,我们为近端因果学习引入了一个正式的潜在结果框架,虽然明确承认协变量测量是混淆机制的不完美代理,但它提供了一个机会,可以在基于测量协变量的互换性失败的情况下了解因果效应。给出了非参数辨识的充分条件,给出了估计的近端g公式和相应的近端g计算算法。这些可以看作是罗宾斯的基本g公式和g计算算法的概括,它们明确地解释了由于未测量的混杂而产生的偏差。考虑了点处理和时变处理设置,并给出了因果效应的近端g计算的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Introduction to Proximal Causal Learning
A standard assumption for causal inference from observational data is that one has measured a sufficiently rich set of covariates to ensure that within covariate strata, subjects are exchangeable across observed treatment values. Skepticism about the exchangeability assumption in observational studies is often warranted because it hinges on investigators' ability to accurately measure covariates capturing all potential sources of confounding. Realistically, confounding mechanisms can rarely if ever, be learned with certainty from measured covariates. One can therefore only ever hope that covariate measurements are at best proxies of true underlying confounding mechanisms operating in an observational study, thus invalidating causal claims made on basis of standard exchangeability conditions. Causal learning from proxies is a challenging inverse problem which has to date remained unresolved. In this paper, we introduce a formal potential outcome framework for proximal causal learning, which while explicitly acknowledging covariate measurements as imperfect proxies of confounding mechanisms, offers an opportunity to learn about causal effects in settings where exchangeability on the basis of measured covariates fails. Sufficient conditions for nonparametric identification are given, leading to the proximal g-formula and corresponding proximal g-computation algorithm for estimation. These may be viewed as generalizations of Robins' foundational g-formula and g-computation algorithm, which account explicitly for bias due to unmeasured confounding. Both point treatment and time-varying treatment settings are considered, and an application of proximal g-computation of causal effects is given for illustration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Empirical Bayes Methods and Applications to Special Types of Data Flexible Bayesian modelling of concomitant covariate effects in mixture models A Critique of Differential Abundance Analysis, and Advocacy for an Alternative Post-Processing of MCMC Conditional variance estimator for sufficient dimension reduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1