4.5 Article

Coherent modeling of longitudinal causal effects on binary outcomes

期刊

BIOMETRICS
卷 79, 期 2, 页码 775-787

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/biom.13687

关键词

bivariate mapping; likelihood inference; longitudinal studies; variation independence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a method to solve the variation dependence problem of binary multiplicative SNMM by reparameterizing the noncausal nuisance parameters. This method allows for coherent modeling of heterogeneous effects in longitudinal studies with binary outcomes and provides a key building block for flexible doubly robust estimation of the causal parameters.
Analyses of biomedical studies often necessitate modeling longitudinal causal effects. The current focus on personalized medicine and effect heterogeneity makes this task even more challenging. Toward this end, structural nested mean models (SNMMs) are fundamental tools for studying heterogeneous treatment effects in longitudinal studies. However, when outcomes are binary, current methods for estimating multiplicative and additive SNMM parameters suffer from variation dependence between the causal parameters and the noncausal nuisance parameters. This leads to a series of difficulties in interpretation, estimation, and computation. These difficulties have hindered the uptake of SNMMs in biomedical practice, where binary outcomes are very common. We solve the variation dependence problem for the binary multiplicative SNMM via a reparameterization of the noncausal nuisance parameters. Our novel nuisance parameters are variation independent of the causal parameters, and hence allow for coherent modeling of heterogeneous effects from longitudinal studies with binary outcomes. Our parameterization also provides a key building block for flexible doubly robust estimation of the causal parameters. Along the way, we prove that an additive SNMM with binary outcomes does not admit a variation independent parameterization, thereby justifying the restriction to multiplicative SNMMs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据