A cautionary note for plasmode simulation studies in the setting of causal inference
因果推断中 Plasmode 模拟研究的注意事项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:摘要明确围绕因果推断中处理效果估计量的偏差与置信区间覆盖评价展开,因此归入因果推断。
因果推断中 Plasmode 模拟研究的注意事项AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Plasmode simulation has become an important tool for evaluating the operating characteristics of different statistical methods in complex settings, such as pharmacoepidemiological studies of treatment effectiveness using electronic health records (EHR) data. These studies provide insight into how estimator performance is impacted by challenges including rare events, small sample size, etc., that can indicate which among a set of methods performs best in a real-world dataset. Plasmode simulation combines data resampled from a real-world dataset with synthetic data to generate a known truth for an estimand in realistic data. There are different potential plasmode strategies currently in use. We compare two popular plasmode simulation frameworks. We provide numerical evidence and a theoretical result, which shows that one of these frameworks can cause certain estimators to incorrectly appear overly biased with lower than nominal confidence interval coverage. Detailed simulation studies using both synthetic and real-world EHR data demonstrate that these pitfalls remain at large sample sizes and when analyzing data from a randomized controlled trial. We conclude with guidance for the choice of a plasmode simulation approach that maintains good theoretical properties to allow a fair evaluation of statistical methods while also maintaining the desired similarity to real data.