A roadmap for systematic identification and analysis of multiple biases in causal inference
因果推断中系统识别与联合分析多重偏差的路线图AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要围绕因果识别假设、因果图及多重偏差的定量敏感性分析展开。
因果推断中系统识别与联合分析多重偏差的路线图AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Observational studies examining causal effects rely on unverifiable assumptions, the violation of which can induce multiple biases. Quantitative bias analysis (QBA) methods examine the sensitivity of findings to such violations, generally, by producing estimates under alternative assumptions, incorporating external information. Although substantial guidance exists for implementing QBA, there is limited guidance on how to systematically determine the assumptions underlying a primary causal analysis and the potential violations that should guide bias analysis. Consequently, many assumptions remain implicit, leading to selective and therefore misleading QBA. To address this gap, we propose a roadmap for systematically identifying and analysing multiple biases. Briefly, this consists of (1) articulating the assumptions underlying the primary analysis through specification and emulation of the ideal trial that defines the causal estimand and depicting these assumptions using a causal diagram; (2) extending the diagram to depict alternative assumptions under which biases may arise; (3) obtaining a single estimate that simultaneously corrects for all potential biases. We illustrate the roadmap using an investigation of the effect of breastfeeding on risk of childhood asthma, and through simulations illustrate the need for analysing multiple biases jointly rather than one at a time.