An introduction to causal reasoning in health analytics

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2105.04655v1
• Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 20:25:56 GMT
• Title: An introduction to causal reasoning in health analytics
• Authors: Wenhao Zhang, Ramin Ramezani, Arash Naeim
• Abstract summary: We will try to highlight some of the drawbacks that may arise in traditional machine learning and statistical approaches to analyze the observational data. We will demonstrate the applications of causal inference in tackling some common machine learning issues.
• Score: 2.199093822766999
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A data science task can be deemed as making sense of the data and/or testing a hypothesis about it. The conclusions inferred from data can greatly guide us to make informative decisions. Big data has enabled us to carry out countless prediction tasks in conjunction with machine learning, such as identifying high risk patients suffering from a certain disease and taking preventable measures. However, healthcare practitioners are not content with mere predictions - they are also interested in the cause-effect relation between input features and clinical outcomes. Understanding such relations will help doctors treat patients and reduce the risk effectively. Causality is typically identified by randomized controlled trials. Often such trials are not feasible when scientists and researchers turn to observational studies and attempt to draw inferences. However, observational studies may also be affected by selection and/or confounding biases that can result in wrong causal conclusions. In this chapter, we will try to highlight some of the drawbacks that may arise in traditional machine learning and statistical approaches to analyze the observational data, particularly in the healthcare data analytics domain. We will discuss causal inference and ways to discover the cause-effect from observational studies in healthcare domain. Moreover, we will demonstrate the applications of causal inference in tackling some common machine learning issues such as missing data and model transportability. Finally, we will discuss the possibility of integrating reinforcement learning with causality as a way to counter confounding bias.

Related papers

• Smoke and Mirrors in Causal Downstream Tasks [59.90654397037007]
  This paper looks at the causal inference task of treatment effect estimation, where the outcome of interest is recorded in high-dimensional observations. We compare 6 480 models fine-tuned from state-of-the-art visual backbones, and find that the sampling and modeling choices significantly affect the accuracy of the causal estimate. Our results suggest that future benchmarks should carefully consider real downstream scientific questions, especially causal ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T13:26:34Z)
• Learning interpretable causal networks from very large datasets, application to 400,000 medical records of breast cancer patients [1.2647816797166165]
  We report a more reliable and scalable causal discovery method (iMIIC) based on a general mutual information supremum principle. We showcase iMIIC on synthetic and real-life healthcare data from 396,179 breast cancer patients from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-11T15:18:19Z)
• Why Interpretable Causal Inference is Important for High-Stakes Decision Making for Critically Ill Patients and How To Do It [80.24494623756839]
  We present a framework for interpretable estimation of causal effects for critically ill patients. We apply this framework to the effect of seizures and other potentially harmful electrical events in the brain on outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-09T18:03:35Z)
• Trying to Outrun Causality with Machine Learning: Limitations of Model Explainability Techniques for Identifying Predictive Variables [7.106986689736828]
  We show that machine learning algorithms are not as flexible as they might seem, and are instead incredibly sensitive to the underling causal structure in the data. We provide some alternative recommendations for researchers wanting to explore the data for important variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-20T17:48:54Z)
• Algorithmic encoding of protected characteristics and its implications on disparities across subgroups [17.415882865534638]
  Machine learning models may pick up undesirable correlations between a patient's racial identity and clinical outcome. Very little is known about how these biases are encoded and how one may reduce or even remove disparate performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-27T20:30:57Z)
• SurvITE: Learning Heterogeneous Treatment Effects from Time-to-Event Data [83.50281440043241]
  We study the problem of inferring heterogeneous treatment effects from time-to-event data. We propose a novel deep learning method for treatment-specific hazard estimation based on balancing representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-26T20:13:17Z)
• Causes of Effects: Learning individual responses from population data [23.593582720307207]
  We study the problem of individualization and its applications in medicine. For example, the probability of benefiting from a treatment concerns an individual having a favorable outcome if treated and an unfavorable outcome if untreated. We analyze and expand on existing research by applying bounds to the probability of necessity and sufficiency (PNS) along with graphical criteria and practical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-28T12:38:11Z)
• Efficient Causal Inference from Combined Observational and Interventional Data through Causal Reductions [68.6505592770171]
  Unobserved confounding is one of the main challenges when estimating causal effects. We propose a novel causal reduction method that replaces an arbitrary number of possibly high-dimensional latent confounders. We propose a learning algorithm to estimate the parameterized reduced model jointly from observational and interventional data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-08T14:29:07Z)
• Enabling Counterfactual Survival Analysis with Balanced Representations [64.17342727357618]
  Survival data are frequently encountered across diverse medical applications, i.e., drug development, risk profiling, and clinical trials. We propose a theoretically grounded unified framework for counterfactual inference applicable to survival outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-14T01:15:00Z)
• Amnesic Probing: Behavioral Explanation with Amnesic Counterfactuals [53.484562601127195]
  We point out the inability to infer behavioral conclusions from probing results. We offer an alternative method that focuses on how the information is being used, rather than on what information is encoded.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-01T15:00:11Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.