scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 1557-4679

The International Journal of Biostatistics 

De Gruyter
About: The International Journal of Biostatistics is an academic journal published by De Gruyter. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Estimator & Covariate. It has an ISSN identifier of 1557-4679. Over the lifetime, 465 publications have been published receiving 10985 citations. The journal is also known as: The international journal of biostatics (Internet).


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors proposed a targeted maximum likelihood density estimator, which is a one-and-k-th step approach to estimate a pathwise differentiable Euclidean parameter.
Abstract: Suppose one observes a sample of independent and identically distributed observations from a particular data generating distribution. Suppose that one is concerned with estimation of a particular pathwise differentiable Euclidean parameter. A substitution estimator evaluating the parameter of a given likelihood based density estimator is typically too biased and might not even converge at the parametric rate: that is, the density estimator was targeted to be a good estimator of the density and might therefore result in a poor estimator of a particular smooth functional of the density. In this article we propose a one step (and, by iteration, k-th step) targeted maximum likelihood density estimator which involves 1) creating a hardest parametric submodel with parameter epsilon through the given density estimator with score equal to the efficient influence curve of the pathwise differentiable parameter at the density estimator, 2) estimating epsilon with the maximum likelihood estimator, and 3) defining a new density estimator as the corresponding update of the original density estimator. We show that iteration of this algorithm results in a targeted maximum likelihood density estimator which solves the efficient influence curve estimating equation and thereby yields a locally efficient estimator of the parameter of interest, under regularity conditions. In particular, we show that, if the parameter is linear and the model is convex, then the targeted maximum likelihood estimator is often achieved in the first step, and it results in a locally efficient estimator at an arbitrary (e.g., heavily misspecified) starting density.We also show that the targeted maximum likelihood estimators are now in full agreement with the locally efficient estimating function methodology as presented in Robins and Rotnitzky (1992) and van der Laan and Robins (2003), creating, in particular, algebraic equivalence between the double robust locally efficient estimators using the targeted maximum likelihood estimators as an estimate of its nuisance parameters, and targeted maximum likelihood estimators. In addition, it is argued that the targeted MLE has various advantages relative to the current estimating function based approach. We proceed by providing data driven methodologies to select the initial density estimator for the targeted MLE, thereby providing data adaptive targeted maximum likelihood estimation methodology. We illustrate the method with various worked out examples.

769 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article compares the use of case-control weighted targeted maximum likelihood estimation in matched and unmatched designs in an effort to explore which design yields the most information about the marginal causal effect.
Abstract: Matched case-control study designs are commonly implemented in the field of public health. While matching is intended to eliminate confounding, the main potential benefit of matching in case-control studies is a gain in efficiency. Methods for analyzing matched case-control studies have focused on utilizing conditional logistic regression models that provide conditional and not causal estimates of the odds ratio. This article investigates the use of case-control weighted targeted maximum likelihood estimation to obtain marginal causal effects in matched case-control study designs. We compare the use of case-control weighted targeted maximum likelihood estimation in matched and unmatched designs in an effort to explore which design yields the most information about the marginal causal effect. The procedures require knowledge of certain prevalence probabilities and were previously described by van der Laan (2008). In many practical situations where a causal effect is the parameter of interest, researchers may be better served using an unmatched design.

251 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The method of matching weights (MWs) as an analog to one-to-one pair matching without replacement on the PS with a caliper is proposed, which offers more efficient estimation, more accurate variance calculation, better balance, and simpler asymptotic analysis.
Abstract: Propensity score (PS) matching is widely used for studying treatment effects in observational studies. This article proposes the method of matching weights (MWs) as an analog to one-to-one pair matching without replacement on the PS with a caliper. Compared with pair matching, the proposed method offers more efficient estimation, more accurate variance calculation, better balance, and simpler asymptotic analysis. A statistical test for the misspecification of the PS model is proposed for balance checking purposes. An augmented version of the MW estimator is developed that has the double robust property, that is, the estimator is consistent, if either the outcome model or the PS model is correct. The proposed method is studied in simulations and illustrated through a real data example.

246 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A simple framework based on a single unobserved dichotomous variable is described that can be used to explore how violations of IV assumptions and treatment effect heterogeneity may bias the standard IV estimator with respect to the average treatment effect in the population.
Abstract: Observational studies of drugs and medical procedures based on administrative data are increasingly used to inform regulatory and clinical decisions. However, the validity of such studies is often questioned because available data may not contain measurements of many important prognostic variables that guide treatment decisions. Recently, approaches to this problem have been proposed that use instrumental variables (IV) defined at the level of an individual health care provider or aggregation of providers. Implicitly, these approaches attempt to estimate causal effects by using differences in medical practice patterns as a quasi-experiment. Although preference-based IV methods may usefully complement standard statistical approaches, they make assumptions that are unfamiliar to most biomedical researchers and therefore the validity of such analyses can be hard to evaluate. Here, we propose a simple framework based on a single unobserved dichotomous variable that can be used to explore how violations of IV assumptions and treatment effect heterogeneity may bias the standard IV estimator with respect to the average treatment effect in the population. This framework suggests various ways to anticipate the likely direction of bias using both empirical data and commonly available subject matter knowledge, such as whether medications or medical procedures tend to be overused, underused, or often misused. This approach is described in the context of a study comparing the gastrointestinal bleeding risk attributable to different non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

213 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article describes an approach to estimate the optimal dynamic treatment regime among a set of enforceable regimes, comprised by regimes defined by simple rules based on a subset of past information and discusses locally efficient, double-robust estimation of the model parameters and of the index of the optimal treatment regime in the set.
Abstract: Dynamic treatment regimes are set rules for sequential decision making based on patient covariate history. Observational studies are well suited for the investigation of the effects of dynamic treatment regimes because of the variability in treatment decisions found in them. This variability exists because different physicians make different decisions in the face of similar patient histories. In this article we describe an approach to estimate the optimal dynamic treatment regime among a set of enforceable regimes. This set is comprised by regimes defined by simple rules based on a subset of past information. The regimes in the set are indexed by a Euclidean vector. The optimal regime is the one that maximizes the expected counterfactual utility over all regimes in the set. We discuss assumptions under which it is possible to identify the optimal regime from observational longitudinal data. Murphy et al. (2001) developed efficient augmented inverse probability weighted estimators of the expected utility of one fixed regime. Our methods are based on an extension of the marginal structural mean model of Robins (1998, 1999) which incorporate the estimation ideas of Murphy et al. (2001). Our models, which we call dynamic regime marginal structural mean models, are specially suitable for estimating the optimal treatment regime in a moderately small class of enforceable regimes of interest. We consider both parametric and semiparametric dynamic regime marginal structural models. We discuss locally efficient, double-robust estimation of the model parameters and of the index of the optimal treatment regime in the set. In a companion paper in this issue of the journal we provide proofs of the main results.

208 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202317
202237
202148
202022
201919
201813