Interpreting treatment-effect estimates with heterogeneity and choice: simulation model results
- PMID: 19446162
- DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.04.007
Interpreting treatment-effect estimates with heterogeneity and choice: simulation model results
Abstract
Background: Researchers using observational data in health-services research use various treatment-effect estimators to reduce the bias associated with unmeasured confounding variables and have focused on estimate differences to indicate the relative ability of these estimators to mitigate bias. However, available estimators may identify different treatment-effect concepts; if treatment effects are heterogeneous across patients and treatment choice reflects "sorting on the gain," then treatment-effect estimates should differ regardless of confounding. Risk-adjustment approaches yield estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT), whereas instrumental variable approaches yield estimates of a local average treatment effect (LATE).
Objective: The goal of this article was to use simulation methods to illustrate the treatment-effect concepts that are identified using observational data with various estimators.
Methods: We simulated patient treatment choices based on expected treatment valuation to observe estimates of both ATT and LATE. Different model scenarios were run to isolate the effects of both treatment-effect heterogeneity and unmeasured confounding on treatment-effect concept estimation. Models were estimated using standard linear and nonlinear estimation methods.
Results: We show that the true values of the underlying treatment concepts differ if patients (with the help of their health care providers) make treatment choices based on expected gains, and that distinct estimators produce estimates of distinct concepts. In scenarios without unmeasured confounding, both linear and nonlinear estimation models produced estimates close to the true value of the concept identified by each estimator. However, nonlinear models suggested additional treatment-effect heterogeneity that does not exist in these scenarios.
Conclusions: Our results suggest that, to ensure clarity and correctness of treatment-effect estimate interpretation, it is important for researchers to state the treatment-effect concept that they are trying to identify before beginning estimation. In addition, theoretical models of treatment choice are needed to provide the foundation linking treatment-effect estimates to treatment-effect concepts and to justify instrument selection.
Similar articles
-
Heterogeneity and the interpretation of treatment effect estimates from risk adjustment and instrumental variable methods.Med Care. 2007 Oct;45(10 Supl 2):S123-30. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318070c069. Med Care. 2007. PMID: 17909370
-
Adjusting for bias and unmeasured confounding in Mendelian randomization studies with binary responses.Int J Epidemiol. 2008 Oct;37(5):1161-8. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyn080. Epub 2008 May 7. Int J Epidemiol. 2008. PMID: 18463132
-
Apples and oranges? Interpretations of risk adjustment and instrumental variable estimates of intended treatment effects using observational data.Am J Epidemiol. 2012 Jan 1;175(1):60-5. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr283. Epub 2011 Nov 15. Am J Epidemiol. 2012. PMID: 22085626
-
Methods to assess intended effects of drug treatment in observational studies are reviewed.J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Dec;57(12):1223-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.011. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004. PMID: 15617947 Review.
-
Marginal structural models might overcome confounding when analyzing multiple treatment effects in observational studies.J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Jun;61(6):525-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.007. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008. PMID: 18471655 Review.
Cited by
-
Assessing the properties of patient-specific treatment effect estimates from causal forest algorithms under essential heterogeneity.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Mar 13;24(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02187-5. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024. PMID: 38481139 Free PMC article.
-
Dealing with confounding in observational studies: A scoping review of methods evaluated in simulation studies with single-point exposure.Stat Med. 2023 Feb 20;42(4):487-516. doi: 10.1002/sim.9628. Epub 2022 Dec 23. Stat Med. 2023. PMID: 36562408 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Assessing the ability of an instrumental variable causal forest algorithm to personalize treatment evidence using observational data: the case of early surgery for shoulder fracture.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Jul 11;22(1):190. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01663-0. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022. PMID: 35818028 Free PMC article.
-
Association of Surgical Treatment With Adverse Events and Mortality Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Proximal Humerus Fracture.JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jan 3;3(1):e1918663. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18663. JAMA Netw Open. 2020. PMID: 31922556 Free PMC article.
-
Applying machine learning to predict real-world individual treatment effects: insights from a virtual patient cohort.J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Oct 1;26(10):977-988. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz036. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019. PMID: 31220274 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
