• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用组套索进行协变量选择以及因果效应的双重稳健估计。

Covariate selection with group lasso and doubly robust estimation of causal effects.

作者信息

Koch Brandon, Vock David M, Wolfson Julian

机构信息

Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S.A.

出版信息

Biometrics. 2018 Mar;74(1):8-17. doi: 10.1111/biom.12736. Epub 2017 Jun 21.

DOI:10.1111/biom.12736
PMID:28636276
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5740021/
Abstract

The efficiency of doubly robust estimators of the average causal effect (ACE) of a treatment can be improved by including in the treatment and outcome models only those covariates which are related to both treatment and outcome (i.e., confounders) or related only to the outcome. However, it is often challenging to identify such covariates among the large number that may be measured in a given study. In this article, we propose GLiDeR (Group Lasso and Doubly Robust Estimation), a novel variable selection technique for identifying confounders and predictors of outcome using an adaptive group lasso approach that simultaneously performs coefficient selection, regularization, and estimation across the treatment and outcome models. The selected variables and corresponding coefficient estimates are used in a standard doubly robust ACE estimator. We provide asymptotic results showing that, for a broad class of data generating mechanisms, GLiDeR yields a consistent estimator of the ACE when either the outcome or treatment model is correctly specified. A comprehensive simulation study shows that GLiDeR is more efficient than doubly robust methods using standard variable selection techniques and has substantial computational advantages over a recently proposed doubly robust Bayesian model averaging method. We illustrate our method by estimating the causal treatment effect of bilateral versus single-lung transplant on forced expiratory volume in one year after transplant using an observational registry.

摘要

通过仅在治疗模型和结果模型中纳入那些与治疗和结果均相关(即混杂因素)或仅与结果相关的协变量,可以提高治疗平均因果效应(ACE)的双稳健估计量的效率。然而,在给定研究中可能测量的大量协变量中识别此类协变量通常具有挑战性。在本文中,我们提出了GLiDeR(组套索和双稳健估计),这是一种新颖的变量选择技术,用于使用自适应组套索方法识别混杂因素和结果预测因子,该方法同时在治疗模型和结果模型中进行系数选择、正则化和估计。所选变量和相应的系数估计用于标准的双稳健ACE估计量。我们提供了渐近结果,表明对于广泛的数据生成机制,当结果模型或治疗模型正确设定时,GLiDeR会产生ACE的一致估计量。一项全面的模拟研究表明,GLiDeR比使用标准变量选择技术的双稳健方法更有效,并且与最近提出的双稳健贝叶斯模型平均方法相比具有显著的计算优势。我们使用一个观察性登记处的数据,通过估计双侧与单肺移植对移植后一年用力呼气量的因果治疗效应来说明我们的方法。

相似文献

1
Covariate selection with group lasso and doubly robust estimation of causal effects.使用组套索进行协变量选择以及因果效应的双重稳健估计。
Biometrics. 2018 Mar;74(1):8-17. doi: 10.1111/biom.12736. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
2
Model misspecification and robustness in causal inference: comparing matching with doubly robust estimation.因果推断中的模型误设定与稳健性:比较匹配法和双重稳健估计。
Stat Med. 2012 Jul 10;31(15):1572-81. doi: 10.1002/sim.4496. Epub 2012 Feb 23.
3
Stratified doubly robust estimators for the average causal effect.平均因果效应的分层双稳健估计量。
Biometrics. 2014 Jun;70(2):270-7. doi: 10.1111/biom.12157. Epub 2014 Feb 26.
4
Evaluation of propensity score methods for causal inference with high-dimensional covariates.高维协变量下因果推断的倾向评分方法评估。
Brief Bioinform. 2022 Jul 18;23(4). doi: 10.1093/bib/bbac227.
5
Machine learning outcome regression improves doubly robust estimation of average causal effects.机器学习结果回归改进了平均因果效应的双重稳健估计。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020 Sep;29(9):1120-1133. doi: 10.1002/pds.5074. Epub 2020 Jul 27.
6
Causal inference in high dimensions: A marriage between Bayesian modeling and good frequentist properties.高维因果推断:贝叶斯建模与良好的频率派性质的结合。
Biometrics. 2022 Mar;78(1):100-114. doi: 10.1111/biom.13417. Epub 2020 Dec 31.
7
Augmented and doubly robust G-estimation of causal effects under a Structural nested failure time model.结构嵌套失效时间模型下因果效应的增强型和双重稳健G估计
Biometrics. 2018 Jun;74(2):472-480. doi: 10.1111/biom.12749. Epub 2017 Jul 25.
8
Doubly robust estimation of causal effects.双重稳健估计因果效应。
Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Apr 1;173(7):761-7. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwq439. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
9
Impact of outcome model misspecification on regression and doubly-robust inverse probability weighting to estimate causal effect.结局模型误设对用于估计因果效应的回归及双重稳健逆概率加权法的影响。
Int J Biostat. 2010;6(2):Article 15. doi: 10.2202/1557-4679.1207.
10
Ultra-high dimensional variable selection for doubly robust causal inference.超高维变量选择在双重稳健因果推断中的应用。
Biometrics. 2023 Jun;79(2):903-914. doi: 10.1111/biom.13625. Epub 2022 Mar 22.

引用本文的文献

1
A doubly robust estimator for continuous treatments in high dimensions.一种用于高维连续治疗的双重稳健估计器。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Feb 13;25(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02488-3.
2
Quantile outcome adaptive lasso: Covariate selection for inverse probability weighting estimator of quantile treatment effects.分位数结果自适应套索法:分位数治疗效果逆概率加权估计量的协变量选择
Stat Methods Med Res. 2025 Jan;34(1):69-84. doi: 10.1177/09622802241299410. Epub 2024 Dec 12.
3
Robust double machine learning model with application to omics data.

本文引用的文献

1
Model averaged double robust estimation.模型平均双稳健估计
Biometrics. 2017 Jun;73(2):410-421. doi: 10.1111/biom.12622. Epub 2016 Nov 28.
2
Bayesian effect estimation accounting for adjustment uncertainty.考虑调整不确定性的贝叶斯效应估计。
Biometrics. 2012 Sep;68(3):661-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01731.x. Epub 2012 Feb 24.
3
Lung transplant in end-staged chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients: a concise review.终末期慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的肺移植:简要综述。
稳健的双机器学习模型及其在组学数据中的应用。
BMC Bioinformatics. 2024 Nov 14;25(1):355. doi: 10.1186/s12859-024-05975-4.
4
Association of preoperative red blood cell width and postoperative 30-day mortality in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study using propensity-score matching.非心脏手术患者术前红细胞分布宽度与术后30天死亡率的关联:一项使用倾向评分匹配的回顾性队列研究
Perioper Med (Lond). 2024 Oct 3;13(1):95. doi: 10.1186/s13741-024-00451-2.
5
Evaluating disparity of subjective cognitive decline between male veterans and non-veterans in the United States using propensity score matching estimation: A behavioral risk factor surveillance system survey cross-sectional study.采用倾向评分匹配估计评估美国男性退伍军人和非退伍军人之间主观认知衰退的差异:一项行为风险因素监测系统调查的横断面研究。
PLoS One. 2024 Sep 13;19(9):e0310102. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310102. eCollection 2024.
6
Association between excessive alcohol consumption and incident diabetes mellitus among Japanese based on propensity score matching.基于倾向评分匹配的日本人群中过量饮酒与新发糖尿病的关系。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 27;14(1):17274. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-68202-3.
7
High-dimensional generalized median adaptive lasso with application to omics data.适用于组学数据的高维广义中位数自适应套索法
Brief Bioinform. 2024 Jan 22;25(2). doi: 10.1093/bib/bbae059.
8
The Impact of Serum Uric Acid Levels on Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy in Advanced Maternal Age Women: A Retrospective Study from a Single Center in China.血清尿酸水平对高龄产妇妊娠期高血压疾病的影响:来自中国单中心的回顾性研究。
Med Sci Monit. 2024 Feb 15;30:e942629. doi: 10.12659/MSM.942629.
9
Propensity score analysis of red cell distribution width to serum calcium ratio in acute myocardial infarction as a predictor of in-hospital mortality.急性心肌梗死中红细胞分布宽度与血清钙比值作为院内死亡预测指标的倾向评分分析
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Dec 19;10:1292153. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1292153. eCollection 2023.
10
Semi-supervised mixture multi-source exchangeability model for leveraging real-world data in clinical trials.半监督混合多源可交换性模型,用于在临床试验中利用真实世界数据。
Biostatistics. 2024 Jul 1;25(3):617-632. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxad024.
J Thorac Dis. 2010 Jun;2(2):111-6.
4
A new criterion for confounder selection.一种新的混杂因素选择标准。
Biometrics. 2011 Dec;67(4):1406-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01619.x. Epub 2011 May 31.
5
On model selection and model misspecification in causal inference.在因果推断中的模型选择和模型误设定。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):7-30. doi: 10.1177/0962280210387717. Epub 2010 Nov 12.
6
Collaborative double robust targeted maximum likelihood estimation.协作双稳健靶向最大似然估计
Int J Biostat. 2010 May 17;6(1):Article 17. doi: 10.2202/1557-4679.1181.
7
Variable selection for propensity score models.倾向得分模型的变量选择
Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Jun 15;163(12):1149-56. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwj149. Epub 2006 Apr 19.
8
Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.在因果治疗效果估计中通过倾向得分进行分层和加权:一项比较研究。
Stat Med. 2004 Oct 15;23(19):2937-60. doi: 10.1002/sim.1903.