论文检索

揭示观测研究中的偏差机制AI 解读

Observational studies are a key resource for causal inference but are often affected by systematic biases. Prior work has focused mainly on detecting these biases, via sensitivity analyses and comparisons with randomized controlled trials, or mitigating them through debiasing techniques. However, there remains a lack of methodology for uncovering the underlying mechanisms driving these biases, e.g., whether due to hidden confounding or selection of participants. In this…

右删失下利用实验数据检验观察性研究AI 解读

Drawing causal inferences from observational studies (OS) requires unverifiable validity assumptions; however, one can falsify those assumptions by benchmarking the OS with experimental data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT). A major limitation of existing procedures is not accounting for censoring, despite the abundance of RCTs and OSes that report right-censored time-to-event outcomes. We consider two cases where censoring time (1) is independent of time-to-event…

共形化无条件分位数回归AI 解读

We develop a predictive inference procedure that combines conformal prediction (CP) with unconditional quantile regression (QR) -- a commonly used tool in econometrics that involves regressing the recentered influence function (RIF) of the quantile functional over input covariates. Unlike the more widely-known conditional QR, unconditional QR explicitly captures the impact of changes in covariate distribution on the quantiles of the marginal distribution of outcomes.…

通过条件矩限制证伪观察性研究的内部与外部有效性AI 解读

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT)s are relied upon to assess new treatments, but suffer from limited power to guide personalized treatment decisions. On the other hand, observational (i.e., non-experimental) studies have large and diverse populations, but are prone to various biases (e.g. residual confounding). To safely leverage the strengths of observational studies, we focus on the problem of falsification, whereby RCTs are used to validate causal effect estimates…