Advanced Causal Inference Techniques

SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models

A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk

With explanatory covariates, the standard analysis for competing risks data involves modeling the cause-specific hazard functions via a proportional hazards assumption. Unfortunately, the cause-specific hazard function does not have a direct interpretation in terms of survival probabilities for the particular failure type. In recent years many clinicians have begun using the cumulative incidence function, the marginal failure probabilities for a particular cause, which is intuitively appealing and more easily explained to the nonstatistician. The cumulative incidence is especially relevant in cost-effectiveness analyses in which the survival probabilities are needed to determine treatment utility. Previously, authors have considered methods for combining estimates of the cause-specific hazard functions under the proportional hazards formulation. However, these methods do not allow the analyst to directly assess the effect of a covariate on the marginal probability function. In this article we propose a novel semiparametric proportional hazards model for the subdistribution. Using the partial likelihood principle and weighting techniques, we derive estimation and inference procedures for the finite-dimensional regression parameter under a variety of censoring scenarios. We give a uniformly consistent estimator for the predicted cumulative incidence for an individual with certain covariates; confidence intervals and bands can be obtained analytically or with an easy-to-implement simulation technique. To contrast the two approaches, we analyze a dataset from a breast cancer clinical trial under both models.

Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research

It is argued that P-values and the tests based upon them give unsatisfactory results, especially in large samples. It is shown that, in regression, when there are many candidate independent variables, standard variable selection procedures can give very misleading results. Also, by selecting a single model, they ignore model uncertainty and so underestimate the uncertainty about quantities of interest. The Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing, model selection, and accounting for model uncertainty is presented. Implementing this is straightforward through the use of the simple and accurate BIC approximation, and it can be done using the output from standard software. Specific results are presented for most of the types of model commonly used in sociology. It is shown that this approach overcomes the difficulties with P-values and standard model selection procedures based on them. It also allows easy comparison of nonnested models, and permits the quantification of the evidence for a null hypothesis of interest, such as a convergence theory or a hypothesis about societal norms.

Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology

In observational studies with exposures or treatments that vary over time, standard approaches for adjustment of confounding are biased when there exist time-dependent confounders that are also affected by previous treatment. This paper introduces marginal structural models, a new class of causal models that allow for improved adjustment of confounding in those situations. The parameters of a marginal structural model can be consistently estimated using a new class of estimators, the inverse-probability-of-treatment weighted estimators.