Comparative effectiveness research often involves evaluating the differences in the risks of an event of interest between two or more treatments using observational data. Often, the post‐treatment outcome of interest is whether the event happens within a pre‐specified time window, which leads to a binary outcome. One source of bias for estimating the causal treatment effect is the presence of confounders, which are usually controlled using propensity score‐based methods. An additional source of bias is right‐censoring, which occurs when the information on the outcome of interest is not completely available due to dropout, study termination, or treatment switch before the event of interest. We propose an inverse probability weighted regression‐based estimator that can simultaneously handle both confounding and right‐censoring, calling the method CIPWR, with the letter C highlighting the censoring component. CIPWR estimates the average treatment effects by averaging the predicted outcomes obtained from a logistic regression model that is fitted using a weighted score function. The CIPWR estimator has a double robustness property such that estimation consistency can be achieved when either the model for the outcome or the models for both treatment and censoring are correctly specified. We establish the asymptotic properties of the CIPWR estimator for conducting inference, and compare its finite sample performance with that of several alternatives through simulation studies. The methods under comparison are applied to a cohort of prostate cancer patients from an insurance claims database for comparing the adverse effects of four candidate drugs for advanced stage prostate cancer.
- Award ID(s):
- NSF-PAR ID:
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
null (Ed.)The increasing impact of algorithmic decisions on people’s lives compels us to scrutinize their fairness and, in particular, the disparate impacts that ostensibly color-blind algorithms can have on different groups. Examples include credit decisioning, hiring, advertising, criminal justice, personalized medicine, and targeted policy making, where in some cases legislative or regulatory frameworks for fairness exist and define specific protected classes. In this paper we study a fundamental challenge to assessing disparate impacts in practice: protected class membership is often not observed in the data. This is particularly a problem in lending and healthcare. We consider the use of an auxiliary data set, such as the U.S. census, to construct models that predict the protected class from proxy variables, such as surname and geolocation. We show that even with such data, a variety of common disparity measures are generally unidentifiable, providing a new perspective on the documented biases of popular proxy-based methods. We provide exact characterizations of the tightest possible set of all possible true disparities that are consistent with the data (and possibly additional assumptions). We further provide optimization-based algorithms for computing and visualizing these sets and statistical tools to assess sampling uncertainty. Together, these enable reliable and robust assessments of disparities—an important tool when disparity assessment can have far-reaching policy implications. We demonstrate this in two case studies with real data: mortgage lending and personalized medicine dosing. This paper was accepted by Hamid Nazerzadeh, Guest Editor for the Special Issue on Data-Driven Prescriptive Analytics.more » « less
Dynamic treatment regimes operationalize precision medicine as a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of clinical intervention, that map up‐to‐date patient information to a recommended intervention. An optimal treatment regime maximizes the mean utility when applied to the population of interest. Methods for estimating an optimal treatment regime assume the data to be fully observed, which rarely occurs in practice. A common approach is to first use multiple imputation and then pool the estimators across imputed datasets. However, this approach requires estimating the joint distribution of patient trajectories, which can be high‐dimensional, especially when there are multiple stages of intervention. We examine the application of inverse probability weighted estimating equations as an alternative to multiple imputation in the context of monotonic missingness. This approach applies to a broad class of estimators of an optimal treatment regime including both Q‐learning and a generalization of outcome weighted learning. We establish consistency under mild regularity conditions and demonstrate its advantages in finite samples using a series of simulation experiments and an application to a schizophrenia study.
The neonatal mortality rate in Rwanda remains above the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3 target of 12 deaths per 1000 live births. As part of a larger effort to reduce preventable neonatal deaths in the country, we conducted a study to examine risk factors for low birthweight. The data were collected via a cost‐efficient cluster‐based outcome‐dependent sampling (ODS) scheme wherein clusters of individuals (health centers) were selected on the basis of, in part, the outcome rate of the individuals. For a given data set collected via a cluster‐based ODS scheme, estimation for a marginal model may proceed via inverse‐probability‐weighted generalized estimating equations, where the cluster‐specific weights are the inverse probability of the health center's inclusion in the sample. In this paper, we provide a detailed treatment of the asymptotic properties of this estimator, together with an explicit expression for the asymptotic variance and a corresponding estimator. Furthermore, motivated by the study we conducted in Rwanda, we propose a number of small‐sample bias corrections to both the point estimates and the standard error estimates. Through simulation, we show that applying these corrections when the number of clusters is small generally reduces the bias in the point estimates, and results in closer to nominal coverage. The proposed methods are applied to data from 18 health centers and 1 district hospital in Rwanda.
null (Ed.)There is increasing attention to evaluating the fairness of search system ranking decisions. These metrics often consider the membership of items to particular groups, often identified using protected attributes such as gender or ethnicity. To date, these metrics typically assume the availability and completeness of protected attribute labels of items. However, the protected attributes of individuals are rarely present, limiting the application of fair ranking metrics in large scale systems. In order to address this problem, we propose a sampling strategy and estimation technique for four fair ranking metrics. We formulate a robust and unbiased estimator which can operate even with very limited number of labeled items. We evaluate our approach using both simulated and real world data. Our experimental results demonstrate that our method can estimate this family of fair ranking metrics and provides a robust, reliable alternative to exhaustive or random data annotation.more » « less