Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jul 1;190(7):1414-1423. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab029.
Observational studies reporting on adjusted associations between childhood body mass index (BMI; weight (kg)/height (m)2) rebound and subsequent cardiometabolic outcomes have often not paid explicit attention to causal inference, including definition of a target causal effect and assumptions for unbiased estimation of that effect. Using data from 649 children in a Boston, Massachusetts-area cohort recruited in 1999-2002, we considered effects of stochastic interventions on a chosen subset of modifiable yet unmeasured exposures expected to be associated with early (<age 4 years) BMI rebound (a proxy measure) on adolescent cardiometabolic outcomes. We considered assumptions under which these effects might be identified with available data. This leads to an analysis where the proxy, rather than the exposure, acts as the exposure in the algorithm. We applied targeted maximum likelihood estimation, a doubly robust approach that naturally incorporates machine learning for nuisance parameters (e.g., propensity score). We found a protective effect of an intervention that assigns modifiable exposures according to the distribution in the observational study of persons without (vs. with) early BMI rebound for fat mass index (fat mass (kg)/ height (m)2; -1.39 units, 95% confidence interval: -1.63, -0.72) but weaker or no effects for other cardiometabolic outcomes. Our results clarify distinctions between algorithms and causal questions, encouraging explicit thinking in causal inference with complex exposures.
观察性研究报告了儿童体重指数 (BMI; 体重 (kg)/身高 (m)2) 反弹与随后的心血管代谢结局之间的调整关联,这些研究通常没有特别关注因果推理,包括目标因果效应的定义和对该效应进行无偏估计的假设。使用 1999-2002 年在马萨诸塞州波士顿地区招募的 649 名儿童的数据,我们考虑了随机干预对选定的可修改但未测量的暴露量的影响,这些暴露量预计与早期 (<4 岁) BMI 反弹 (替代指标) 有关在青少年心血管代谢结局上。我们考虑了在这些效应可以通过现有数据识别的假设。这导致了一种分析,其中代理,而不是暴露,作为算法中的暴露。我们应用了靶向最大似然估计,这是一种双重稳健方法,它自然地将机器学习纳入了混杂参数(例如倾向评分)。我们发现,根据没有(与有)早期 BMI 反弹的人群的观察性研究中的分布对脂肪量指数 (fat mass (kg)/ height (m)2; -1.39 个单位,95%置信区间:-1.63,-0.72) 进行可修改暴露的干预具有保护作用,但对其他心血管代谢结局的影响较弱或没有。我们的结果阐明了算法和因果问题之间的区别,鼓励在具有复杂暴露的因果推理中进行明确思考。