Sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding in causal inference based on exponential tilting and super learner

References

• T. Ahmad, A. Munir, S.H. Bhatti, M. Aftab, and M.A. Raza, Survival analysis of heart failure patients: A case study, PLoS One 12 (2017), pp. e0181001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Breiman, J. Friedman, C.J. Stone, and R.A. Olshen, Classification and Regression Trees, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1984.
   Google Scholar
• N.B. Carnegie, M. Harada, and J.L. Hill, Assessing sensitivity to unmeasured confounding using a simulated potential confounder, J. Res. Educ. Eff. 9 (2016), pp. 395–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Cornfield, W. Haenszel, E.C. Hammond, A.M. Lilienfeld, M.B. Shimkin, and E.L. Wynder, Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions, J. Natl. Cancer. Inst. 22 (1959), pp. 173–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.H. Dehejia and S. Wahba, Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: reevaluating the evaluation of training programs, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 94 (1999), pp. 1053–1062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Ding and T.J. VanderWeele, Sensitivity analysis without assumptions, Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) 27 (2016), pp. 368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• V. Dorie, M. Harada, N.B. Carnegie, and J. Hill, A flexible, interpretable framework for assessing sensitivity to unmeasured confounding, Stat. Med. 35 (2016), pp. 3453–3470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.H. Groenwold, D.B. Nelson, K.L. Nichol, A.W. Hoes, and E. Hak, Sensitivity analyses to estimate the potential impact of unmeasured confounding in causal research, Int. J. Epidemiol. 39 (2010), pp. 107–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T.J. Hastie and R.J. Tibshirani, Generalized Additive Models, vol. 43. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1990.
   Google Scholar
• T.K. Ho, Random Decision Forests. In Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, vol. 1, pp. 278–282. IEEE, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• J. Hogan, M. Daniels, and L. Hu, A Bayesian Perspective on Assessing Sensitivity to Assumptions About Unobserved Data, Handbook of Missing Data Methodology, Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, 2014. [Google Scholar]
   Google Scholar
• G.W. Imbens, Sensitivity to exogeneity assumptions in program evaluation, Am. Econ. Rev. 93 (2003), pp. 126–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Jung, R. Shroff, A. Feller, and S. Goel, Algorithmic Decision Making in the Presence of Unmeasured Confounding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.01868, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• R.J. LaLonde, Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data, Am. Econ. Rev. 76 (1986), pp. 604–620.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.Y. Lin, B.M. Psaty, and R.A. Kronmal, Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies, Biometrics 54 (1998), pp. 948–963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.K. Lunceford and M. Davidian, Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study, Stat. Med.23 (2004), pp. 2937–2960.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L.C. McCandless and P. Gustafson, A comparison of bayesian and monte carlo sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding, Stat. Med. 36 (2017), pp. 2887–2901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L.C. McCandless, P. Gustafson, and A. Levy, Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies, Stat. Med. 26 (2007), pp. 2331–2347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.S. Neyman, On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on principles. section 9.(translated and edited by D.M. Dabrowska and T.P. Speed, statistical science (1990), 5, 465–480), Ann. Agric. Sci. 10 (1923), pp. 1–51.
   Google Scholar
• E.C. Polley, S. Rose, and M.J. Van der Laan, Super Learning. In Targeted Learning, M.J. Van der Laan, and S. Rose, eds., pp. 43–66. Springer, New York, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• J.M. Robins, M.A. Hernan, and B. Brumback, Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology, Epidemiology 11 (2000) pp. 550–560.
   Google Scholar
• J.M. Robins, A. Rotnitzky, and L.P. Zhao, Analysis of semiparametric regression models for repeated outcomes in the presence of missing data, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90 (1995), pp. 106–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Rosenbaum, T. Colton, and P. Armitage, Encyclopedia of Biostatistics, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• P.R. Rosenbaum and D.B. Rubin, Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome, J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 45 (1983), pp. 212–218.
   Google Scholar
• P.R. Rosenbaum and D.B. Rubin, The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects, Biometrika 70 (1983), pp. 41–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Rotnitzky, Q. Lei, M. Sued, and J.M. Robins, Improved double-robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models, Biometrika 99 (2012), pp. 439–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Rotnitzky, J.M. Robins, and D.O. Scharfstein, Semiparametric regression for repeated outcomes with nonignorable nonresponse, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 93 (1998), pp. 1321–1339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Roy, K.J. Lum, and M.J. Daniels, A bayesian nonparametric approach to marginal structural models for point treatments and a continuous or survival outcome, Biostatistics 18 (2017), pp. 32–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.B. Rubin, Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies, J. Educ. Psychol. 66 (1974), pp. 688.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Scharfstein, A. McDermott, W. Olson, and F. Wiegand, Global sensitivity analysis for repeated measures studies with informative dropout: A fully parametric approach, Stat. Biopharm. Res. 6 (2014), pp. 338–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.O. Scharfstein, A. Rotnitzky, and J.M. Robins, Adjusting for nonignorable drop-out using semiparametric nonresponse models, J. Am. Stat. Assoc.94 (1999), pp. 1096–1120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Z. Tan, Regression and weighting methods for causal inference using instrumental variables, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 101 (2006), pp. 1607–1618.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.J. Van der Laan, E.C. Polley, and A.E. Hubbard, Super learner, Stat. Appl. Genet. Mol. Biol. 6 (2007), pp. 1544–6115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.J. Van der Laan and S. Rose, Targeted Learning: Causal Inference for Observational and Experimental Data, Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• T.J. VanderWeele and P. Ding, Sensitivity analysis in observational research: introducing the e-value, Ann. Intern. Med. 167 (2017), pp. 268–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• V. Veitch and A. Zaveri, Sense and sensitivity analysis: simple post-hoc analysis of BIAS due to unobserved confounding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.01747, 2020.
   Google Scholar