Loading…

Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation

Causal inference with observational data can be performed under an assumption of no unobserved confounders (unconfoundedness assumption). There is, however, seldom clear subject-matter or empirical evidence for such an assumption. We therefore develop uncertainty intervals for average causal effects...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Biometrics 2019-06, Vol.75 (2), p.506-515
Main Authors: Genbäck, Minna, de Luna, Xavier
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723
container_end_page 515
container_issue 2
container_start_page 506
container_title Biometrics
container_volume 75
creator Genbäck, Minna
de Luna, Xavier
description Causal inference with observational data can be performed under an assumption of no unobserved confounders (unconfoundedness assumption). There is, however, seldom clear subject-matter or empirical evidence for such an assumption. We therefore develop uncertainty intervals for average causal effects based on outcome regression estimators and doubly robust estimators, which provide inference taking into account both sampling variability and uncertainty due to unobserved confounders. In contrast with sampling variation, uncertainty due to unobserved confounding does not decrease with increasing sample size. The intervals introduced are obtained by modeling the treatment assignment mechanism and its correlation with the outcome given the observed confounders, allowing us to derive the bias of the estimators due to unobserved confounders. We are thus also able to contrast the size of the bias due to violation of the unconfoundedness assumption, with bias due to misspecification of the models used to explain potential outcomes. This is illustrated through numerical experiments where bias due to moderate unobserved confounding dominates misspecification bias for typical situations in terms of sample size and modeling assumptions. We also study the empirical coverage of the uncertainty intervals introduced and apply the results to a study of the effect of regular food intake on health. An R-package implementing the inference proposed is available.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/biom.13001
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_DiVA_org_umu_153868</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45213453</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45213453</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kV1rFDEUhoModlu98QdIQIQiTM13Zi_r-lWo9EbFu5DJnCyzzCRrMrHsvzfrtEW8MDcheZ_znnN4EXpByQWt5203xOmCckLoI7SiUtCGCEYeoxUhRDVc0B8n6DTnXX2uJWFP0QknghMp-AqNG1uyHfEQPCQIDrB1LpYwD2GLfUy4hNhlSL-gxy4GX6X-KFk_Q8KxzC5OgBNsE-Q8xIBt6HEfSzcecIpdyTOGPA-Tnav4DD3xdszw_O4-Q98-fvi6-dxc33y62lxeN04wSRvJCHDSW8WUhjXnvuWCrF39XAtCem-1dsy3UvhecaWU10A7rUQHWrdaM36GmsU338K-dGaf6gDpYKIdzPvh-6WJaWvKVAyVvFVt5c8Xfp_iz1LnNdOQHYyjDRBLNoxy3jKp1qKir_5Bd7GkULcxjOnaXzChKvVmoVyKOSfwDyNQYo6ZmWNm5k9mFX55Z1m6CfoH9D6kCtAFuB1GOPzHyry7uvlyb_p6qdnlOaa_axgn2ghZdxKS899qHK18</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2277784246</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation</title><source>EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text</source><source>Oxford University Press:Jisc Collections:OUP Read and Publish 2024-2025 (2024 collection) (Reading list)</source><creator>Genbäck, Minna ; de Luna, Xavier</creator><creatorcontrib>Genbäck, Minna ; de Luna, Xavier</creatorcontrib><description>Causal inference with observational data can be performed under an assumption of no unobserved confounders (unconfoundedness assumption). There is, however, seldom clear subject-matter or empirical evidence for such an assumption. We therefore develop uncertainty intervals for average causal effects based on outcome regression estimators and doubly robust estimators, which provide inference taking into account both sampling variability and uncertainty due to unobserved confounders. In contrast with sampling variation, uncertainty due to unobserved confounding does not decrease with increasing sample size. The intervals introduced are obtained by modeling the treatment assignment mechanism and its correlation with the outcome given the observed confounders, allowing us to derive the bias of the estimators due to unobserved confounders. We are thus also able to contrast the size of the bias due to violation of the unconfoundedness assumption, with bias due to misspecification of the models used to explain potential outcomes. This is illustrated through numerical experiments where bias due to moderate unobserved confounding dominates misspecification bias for typical situations in terms of sample size and modeling assumptions. We also study the empirical coverage of the uncertainty intervals introduced and apply the results to a study of the effect of regular food intake on health. An R-package implementing the inference proposed is available.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0006-341X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1541-0420</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1541-0420</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/biom.13001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30430543</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Average causal effects ; Bias ; Causality ; Computer Simulation ; Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; DISCUSSION PAPERS ; double robust ; Eating - physiology ; Economic models ; Estimators ; Food intake ; Health ; Humans ; ignorability assumption ; Inference ; Intervals ; Observational Studies as Topic ; regular food intake ; Robustness (mathematics) ; Sample Size ; Sampling ; sensitivity analysis ; Statistics ; statistik ; Uncertainty ; uncertainty intervals</subject><ispartof>Biometrics, 2019-06, Vol.75 (2), p.506-515</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2019 International Biometric Society</rights><rights>2019 International Biometric Society</rights><rights>2019 International Biometric Society.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3187-1987 ; 0000-0002-9107-6486</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430543$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153868$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Genbäck, Minna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Luna, Xavier</creatorcontrib><title>Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation</title><title>Biometrics</title><addtitle>Biometrics</addtitle><description>Causal inference with observational data can be performed under an assumption of no unobserved confounders (unconfoundedness assumption). There is, however, seldom clear subject-matter or empirical evidence for such an assumption. We therefore develop uncertainty intervals for average causal effects based on outcome regression estimators and doubly robust estimators, which provide inference taking into account both sampling variability and uncertainty due to unobserved confounders. In contrast with sampling variation, uncertainty due to unobserved confounding does not decrease with increasing sample size. The intervals introduced are obtained by modeling the treatment assignment mechanism and its correlation with the outcome given the observed confounders, allowing us to derive the bias of the estimators due to unobserved confounders. We are thus also able to contrast the size of the bias due to violation of the unconfoundedness assumption, with bias due to misspecification of the models used to explain potential outcomes. This is illustrated through numerical experiments where bias due to moderate unobserved confounding dominates misspecification bias for typical situations in terms of sample size and modeling assumptions. We also study the empirical coverage of the uncertainty intervals introduced and apply the results to a study of the effect of regular food intake on health. An R-package implementing the inference proposed is available.</description><subject>Average causal effects</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Causality</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>DISCUSSION PAPERS</subject><subject>double robust</subject><subject>Eating - physiology</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Estimators</subject><subject>Food intake</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>ignorability assumption</subject><subject>Inference</subject><subject>Intervals</subject><subject>Observational Studies as Topic</subject><subject>regular food intake</subject><subject>Robustness (mathematics)</subject><subject>Sample Size</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>sensitivity analysis</subject><subject>Statistics</subject><subject>statistik</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>uncertainty intervals</subject><issn>0006-341X</issn><issn>1541-0420</issn><issn>1541-0420</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kV1rFDEUhoModlu98QdIQIQiTM13Zi_r-lWo9EbFu5DJnCyzzCRrMrHsvzfrtEW8MDcheZ_znnN4EXpByQWt5203xOmCckLoI7SiUtCGCEYeoxUhRDVc0B8n6DTnXX2uJWFP0QknghMp-AqNG1uyHfEQPCQIDrB1LpYwD2GLfUy4hNhlSL-gxy4GX6X-KFk_Q8KxzC5OgBNsE-Q8xIBt6HEfSzcecIpdyTOGPA-Tnav4DD3xdszw_O4-Q98-fvi6-dxc33y62lxeN04wSRvJCHDSW8WUhjXnvuWCrF39XAtCem-1dsy3UvhecaWU10A7rUQHWrdaM36GmsU338K-dGaf6gDpYKIdzPvh-6WJaWvKVAyVvFVt5c8Xfp_iz1LnNdOQHYyjDRBLNoxy3jKp1qKir_5Bd7GkULcxjOnaXzChKvVmoVyKOSfwDyNQYo6ZmWNm5k9mFX55Z1m6CfoH9D6kCtAFuB1GOPzHyry7uvlyb_p6qdnlOaa_axgn2ghZdxKS899qHK18</recordid><startdate>201906</startdate><enddate>201906</enddate><creator>Genbäck, Minna</creator><creator>de Luna, Xavier</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D93</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3187-1987</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9107-6486</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201906</creationdate><title>Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation</title><author>Genbäck, Minna ; de Luna, Xavier</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Average causal effects</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Causality</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>DISCUSSION PAPERS</topic><topic>double robust</topic><topic>Eating - physiology</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Estimators</topic><topic>Food intake</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>ignorability assumption</topic><topic>Inference</topic><topic>Intervals</topic><topic>Observational Studies as Topic</topic><topic>regular food intake</topic><topic>Robustness (mathematics)</topic><topic>Sample Size</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>sensitivity analysis</topic><topic>Statistics</topic><topic>statistik</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>uncertainty intervals</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Genbäck, Minna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Luna, Xavier</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Umeå universitet</collection><jtitle>Biometrics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Genbäck, Minna</au><au>de Luna, Xavier</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation</atitle><jtitle>Biometrics</jtitle><addtitle>Biometrics</addtitle><date>2019-06</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>75</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>506</spage><epage>515</epage><pages>506-515</pages><issn>0006-341X</issn><issn>1541-0420</issn><eissn>1541-0420</eissn><abstract>Causal inference with observational data can be performed under an assumption of no unobserved confounders (unconfoundedness assumption). There is, however, seldom clear subject-matter or empirical evidence for such an assumption. We therefore develop uncertainty intervals for average causal effects based on outcome regression estimators and doubly robust estimators, which provide inference taking into account both sampling variability and uncertainty due to unobserved confounders. In contrast with sampling variation, uncertainty due to unobserved confounding does not decrease with increasing sample size. The intervals introduced are obtained by modeling the treatment assignment mechanism and its correlation with the outcome given the observed confounders, allowing us to derive the bias of the estimators due to unobserved confounders. We are thus also able to contrast the size of the bias due to violation of the unconfoundedness assumption, with bias due to misspecification of the models used to explain potential outcomes. This is illustrated through numerical experiments where bias due to moderate unobserved confounding dominates misspecification bias for typical situations in terms of sample size and modeling assumptions. We also study the empirical coverage of the uncertainty intervals introduced and apply the results to a study of the effect of regular food intake on health. An R-package implementing the inference proposed is available.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>30430543</pmid><doi>10.1111/biom.13001</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3187-1987</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9107-6486</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0006-341X
ispartof Biometrics, 2019-06, Vol.75 (2), p.506-515
issn 0006-341X
1541-0420
1541-0420
language eng
recordid cdi_swepub_primary_oai_DiVA_org_umu_153868
source EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text; Oxford University Press:Jisc Collections:OUP Read and Publish 2024-2025 (2024 collection) (Reading list)
subjects Average causal effects
Bias
Causality
Computer Simulation
Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic
Data Interpretation, Statistical
DISCUSSION PAPERS
double robust
Eating - physiology
Economic models
Estimators
Food intake
Health
Humans
ignorability assumption
Inference
Intervals
Observational Studies as Topic
regular food intake
Robustness (mathematics)
Sample Size
Sampling
sensitivity analysis
Statistics
statistik
Uncertainty
uncertainty intervals
title Causal inference accounting for unobserved confounding after outcome regression and doubly robust estimation
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T16%3A07%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Causal%20inference%20accounting%20for%20unobserved%20confounding%20after%20outcome%20regression%20and%20doubly%20robust%20estimation&rft.jtitle=Biometrics&rft.au=Genb%C3%A4ck,%20Minna&rft.date=2019-06&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=506&rft.epage=515&rft.pages=506-515&rft.issn=0006-341X&rft.eissn=1541-0420&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/biom.13001&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_swepu%3E45213453%3C/jstor_swepu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4251-520e30da6267e933f83409c0e39400dfa77c2f854fd63666f7e1b764be7787723%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2277784246&rft_id=info:pmid/30430543&rft_jstor_id=45213453&rfr_iscdi=true