PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16401269

Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.

Abstract

The goal of this article is to construct doubly robust (DR) estimators in ignorable missing data and causal inference models. In a missing data model, an estimator is DR if it remains consistent when either (but not necessarily both) a model for the missingness mechanism or a model for the distribution of the complete data is correctly specified. Because with observational data one can never be sure that either a missingness model or a complete data model is correct, perhaps the best that can be hoped for is to find a DR estimator. DR estimators, in contrast to standard likelihood-based or (nonaugmented) inverse probability-weighted estimators, give the analyst two chances, instead of only one, to make a valid inference. In a causal inference model, an estimator is DR if it remains consistent when either a model for the treatment assignment mechanism or a model for the distribution of the counterfactual data is correctly specified. Because with observational data one can never be sure that a model for the treatment assignment mechanism or a model for the counterfactual data is correct, inference based on DR estimators should improve upon previous approaches. Indeed, we present the results of simulation studies which demonstrate that the finite sample performance of DR estimators is as impressive as theory would predict. The proposed method is applied to a cardiovascular clinical trial.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Heejung Bang, James M Robins. 2005. Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00377.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparing onset of antidepressant action using a repeated measures approach and a traditional assessment schedule.

BACKGROUND: It has been recommended that onset of antidepressant action be assessed using survival analyses with assessments taken at least twice per week. However, such an assessment schedule is problematic to implement. The present study assessed the feasibility of comparing onset of action between treatments using a categorical repeated measures approach with a traditional assessment schedule. METHOD: Four scenarios representative of antidepressant clinical trials were created by varying mean improvements over time. Two assessment schedules were compared within the simulated 8-week studies: (i) 'frequent' assessment--16 postbaseline visits (twice-weekly for 8 weeks); (ii) 'traditional' assessment--5 postbaseline visits (Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8). Onset was defined as a 20 per cent improvement from baseline, and had to be sustained at all subsequent assessments. Differences between treatments were analysed with a survival analysis (KM = Kaplan-Meier product limit method) and a categorical mixed-effects model repeated measures analysis (MMRM-CAT). RESULTS: More frequent assessments resulted in small reductions in empirical standard errors compared with traditional assessments for both analytic methods. More frequent assessments altered estimates of treatment group differences in KM such that power was increased when the difference between treatments was increasing over time, but power decreased when the treatment difference decreased over time. More frequent assessments had a minimal effect on estimates of treatment group differences in MMRM-CAT. The MMRM-CAT analysis of data from a traditional assessment schedule provided adequate control of type I error, and had power comparable to or greater than that with KM analyses of data from either a frequent or a traditional assessment schedule. CONCLUSION: In the scenarios tested in this study it was reasonable to assess treatment group differences in onset of action with MMRM-CAT and a traditional assessment schedule. Additional research is needed to assess whether these findings hold in data with drop-out and across definitions of onset.

Antidepressive Agents↗

Mitochondrial-related gene expression changes are sensitive to agonal-pH state: implications for brain disorders.

Mitochondrial defects in gene expression have been implicated in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. We have now contrasted control brains with low pH versus high pH and showed that 28% of genes in mitochondrial-related pathways meet criteria for differential expression. A majority of genes in the mitochondrial, chaperone and proteasome pathways of nuclear DNA-encoded gene expression were decreased with decreased brain pH, whereas a majority of genes in the apoptotic and reactive oxygen stress pathways showed an increased gene expression with a decreased brain pH. There was a significant increase in mitochondrial DNA copy number and mitochondrial DNA gene expression with increased agonal duration. To minimize effects of agonal-pH state on mood disorder comparisons, two classic approaches were used, removing all subjects with low pH and agonal factors from analysis, or grouping low and high pH as a separate variable. Three groups of potential candidate genes emerged that may be mood disorder related: (a) genes that showed no sensitivity to pH but were differentially expressed in bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder; (b) genes that were altered by agonal-pH in one direction but altered in mood disorder in the opposite direction to agonal-pH and (c) genes with agonal-pH sensitivity that displayed the same direction of changes in mood disorder. Genes from these categories such as NR4A1 and HSPA2 were confirmed with Q-PCR. The interpretation of postmortem brain studies involving broad mitochondrial gene expression and related pathway alterations must be monitored against the strong effect of agonal-pH state. Genes with the least sensitivity to agonal-pH could present a starting point for candidate gene search in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Antidepressive Agents↗