• 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

通过损失函数校准进行稳健的倾向得分估计。

Robust propensity score estimation via loss function calibration.

作者信息

Shang Yimeng, Chiu Yu-Han, Kong Lan

机构信息

Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.

出版信息

Stat Methods Med Res. 2025 Mar;34(3):457-472. doi: 10.1177/09622802241308709. Epub 2025 Feb 12.

DOI:10.1177/09622802241308709
PMID:39943776
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11951360/
Abstract

Propensity score estimation is often used as a preliminary step to estimate the average treatment effect with observational data. Nevertheless, misspecification of propensity score models undermines the validity of effect estimates in subsequent analyses. Prediction-based machine learning algorithms are increasingly used to estimate propensity scores to allow for more complex relationships between covariates. However, these approaches may not necessarily achieve covariates balancing. We propose a calibration-based method to better incorporate covariate balance properties in a general modeling framework. Specifically, we calibrate the loss function by adding a covariate imbalance penalty to standard parametric (e.g. logistic regressions) or machine learning models (e.g. neural networks). Our approach may mitigate the impact of model misspecification by explicitly taking into account the covariate balance in the propensity score estimation process. The empirical results show that the proposed method is robust to propensity score model misspecification. The integration of loss function calibration improves the balance of covariates and reduces the root-mean-square error of causal effect estimates. When the propensity score model is misspecified, the neural-network-based model yields the best estimator with less bias and smaller variance as compared to other methods considered.

摘要

倾向得分估计通常被用作利用观测数据估计平均治疗效果的初步步骤。然而,倾向得分模型的错误设定会破坏后续分析中效果估计的有效性。基于预测的机器学习算法越来越多地用于估计倾向得分,以考虑协变量之间更复杂的关系。然而,这些方法不一定能实现协变量平衡。我们提出一种基于校准的方法,以便在通用建模框架中更好地纳入协变量平衡特性。具体而言,我们通过向标准参数模型(如逻辑回归)或机器学习模型(如神经网络)添加协变量不平衡惩罚来校准损失函数。我们的方法可以通过在倾向得分估计过程中明确考虑协变量平衡来减轻模型错误设定的影响。实证结果表明,所提出的方法对倾向得分模型的错误设定具有鲁棒性。损失函数校准的整合改善了协变量的平衡,并降低了因果效应估计的均方根误差。当倾向得分模型被错误设定时,与其他考虑的方法相比,基于神经网络的模型产生的估计量偏差更小、方差更小。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/a51f88097fe8/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/8d49b06dbc82/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/96fe8e28b237/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/9acc7d37b71c/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/9db7d613175a/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/18742db1da1c/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/a51f88097fe8/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/8d49b06dbc82/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/96fe8e28b237/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/9acc7d37b71c/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/9db7d613175a/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/18742db1da1c/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0ad/11951360/a51f88097fe8/10.1177_09622802241308709-fig6.jpg

相似文献

1
Robust propensity score estimation via loss function calibration.通过损失函数校准进行稳健的倾向得分估计。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2025 Mar;34(3):457-472. doi: 10.1177/09622802241308709. Epub 2025 Feb 12.
2
Prognostic score-based model averaging approach for propensity score estimation.基于预后评分的模型平均倾向评分估计方法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Oct 3;24(1):228. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02350-y.
3
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.
4
Estimation of average treatment effect based on a multi-index propensity score.基于多指标倾向评分的平均处理效应估计。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Dec 28;22(1):337. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01822-3.
5
The Balance Super Learner: A robust adaptation of the Super Learner to improve estimation of the average treatment effect in the treated based on propensity score matching.平衡超级学习者:超级学习者的稳健自适应方法,可提高基于倾向评分匹配的处理组平均处理效应估计的稳健性。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Aug;27(8):2504-2518. doi: 10.1177/0962280216682055. Epub 2016 Dec 15.
6
Double Robust Efficient Estimators of Longitudinal Treatment Effects: Comparative Performance in Simulations and a Case Study.纵向治疗效果的双重稳健有效估计量:模拟中的比较性能及一个案例研究
Int J Biostat. 2019 Feb 26;15(2):/j/ijb.2019.15.issue-2/ijb-2017-0054/ijb-2017-0054.xml. doi: 10.1515/ijb-2017-0054.
7
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.
8
Propensity score analysis with local balance.倾向评分分析与局部平衡。
Stat Med. 2023 Jul 10;42(15):2637-2660. doi: 10.1002/sim.9741. Epub 2023 Apr 3.
9
A comparison of machine learning algorithms and covariate balance measures for propensity score matching and weighting.用于倾向得分匹配和加权的机器学习算法与协变量平衡度量的比较
Biom J. 2019 Jul;61(4):1049-1072. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201800132. Epub 2019 May 14.
10
The role of prediction modeling in propensity score estimation: an evaluation of logistic regression, bCART, and the covariate-balancing propensity score.预测建模在倾向评分估计中的作用:逻辑回归、bCART 和协变量平衡倾向评分的评估。
Am J Epidemiol. 2014 Sep 15;180(6):645-55. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwu181. Epub 2014 Aug 20.

本文引用的文献

1
Propensity score analysis with local balance.倾向评分分析与局部平衡。
Stat Med. 2023 Jul 10;42(15):2637-2660. doi: 10.1002/sim.9741. Epub 2023 Apr 3.
2
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.
3
An introduction to inverse probability of treatment weighting in observational research.观察性研究中治疗权重逆概率法简介。
Clin Kidney J. 2021 Aug 26;15(1):14-20. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfab158. eCollection 2022 Jan.
4
Propensity score weighting for causal subgroup analysis.倾向评分加权法在因果亚组分析中的应用。
Stat Med. 2021 Aug 30;40(19):4294-4309. doi: 10.1002/sim.9029. Epub 2021 May 12.
5
Propensity score analysis methods with balancing constraints: A Monte Carlo study.带平衡约束的倾向评分分析方法:一项蒙特卡罗研究。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2021 Apr;30(4):1119-1142. doi: 10.1177/0962280220983512. Epub 2021 Feb 1.
6
Propensity score adjustment using machine learning classification algorithms to control selection bias in online surveys.使用机器学习分类算法进行倾向评分调整,以控制在线调查中的选择偏差。
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 22;15(4):e0231500. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231500. eCollection 2020.
7
A comparison of machine learning algorithms and covariate balance measures for propensity score matching and weighting.用于倾向得分匹配和加权的机器学习算法与协变量平衡度量的比较
Biom J. 2019 Jul;61(4):1049-1072. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201800132. Epub 2019 May 14.
8
Balance diagnostics after propensity score matching.倾向得分匹配后的平衡诊断
Ann Transl Med. 2019 Jan;7(1):16. doi: 10.21037/atm.2018.12.10.
9
Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods.运用模拟研究评估统计方法。
Stat Med. 2019 May 20;38(11):2074-2102. doi: 10.1002/sim.8086. Epub 2019 Jan 16.
10
Chasing balance and other recommendations for improving nonparametric propensity score models.追求平衡及其他改进非参数倾向得分模型的建议。
J Causal Inference. 2017;5(2). doi: 10.1515/jci-2015-0026. Epub 2017 Jan 13.