Evaluating Treatment Prioritization Rules via Rank-Weighted Average Treatment Effects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2111.07966v2
• Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 20:36:45 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Treatment Prioritization Rules via Rank-Weighted Average Treatment Effects
• Authors: Steve Yadlowsky, Scott Fleming, Nigam Shah, Emma Brunskill, Stefan Wager
• Abstract summary: We propose rank-weighted average treatment effect metrics as a simple and general family of metrics for comparing and testing the quality of treatment prioritization rules. RATE metrics are agnostic to how the prioritization rules were derived, and only assess how well they identify individuals that benefit the most from treatment. We showcase RATE in the context of a number of applications, including optimal targeting of aspirin to stroke patients.
• Score: 24.258855352542096
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: There are a number of available methods for selecting whom to prioritize for treatment, including ones based on treatment effect estimation, risk scoring, and hand-crafted rules. We propose rank-weighted average treatment effect (RATE) metrics as a simple and general family of metrics for comparing and testing the quality of treatment prioritization rules. RATE metrics are agnostic as to how the prioritization rules were derived, and only assess how well they identify individuals that benefit the most from treatment. We define a family of RATE estimators and prove a central limit theorem that enables asymptotically exact inference in a wide variety of randomized and observational study settings. RATE metrics subsume a number of existing metrics, including the Qini coefficient, and our analysis directly yields inference methods for these metrics. We showcase RATE in the context of a number of applications, including optimal targeting of aspirin to stroke patients.

Related papers

• Are causal effect estimations enough for optimal recommendations under multitreatment scenarios? [2.4578723416255754]
  It is essential to include a causal effect estimation analysis to compare potential outcomes under different treatments or controls. We propose a comprehensive methodology for multitreatment selection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T16:37:35Z)
• Optimal Baseline Corrections for Off-Policy Contextual Bandits [61.740094604552475]
  We aim to learn decision policies that optimize an unbiased offline estimate of an online reward metric. We propose a single framework built on their equivalence in learning scenarios. Our framework enables us to characterize the variance-optimal unbiased estimator and provide a closed-form solution for it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:52:22Z)
• Individualized Multi-Treatment Response Curves Estimation using RBF-net with Shared Neurons [1.1119247609126184]
  Our non-parametric modeling of the response curves relies on radial basis function (RBF)-nets with shared hidden neurons. Applying our proposed method to MIMIC data, we obtain several interesting findings related to the impact of different treatment strategies on the length of ICU stay and 12-hour SOFA score for sepsis patients who are home-discharged.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T21:13:01Z)
• Targeted Machine Learning for Average Causal Effect Estimation Using the Front-Door Functional [3.0232957374216953]
  evaluating the average causal effect (ACE) of a treatment on an outcome often involves overcoming the challenges posed by confounding factors in observational studies. Here, we introduce novel estimation strategies for the front-door criterion based on the targeted minimum loss-based estimation theory. We demonstrate the applicability of these estimators to analyze the effect of early stage academic performance on future yearly income.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T22:04:53Z)
• Likelihood Ratio Confidence Sets for Sequential Decision Making [51.66638486226482]
  We revisit the likelihood-based inference principle and propose to use likelihood ratios to construct valid confidence sequences. Our method is especially suitable for problems with well-specified likelihoods. We show how to provably choose the best sequence of estimators and shed light on connections to online convex optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T00:10:21Z)
• Robust and Agnostic Learning of Conditional Distributional Treatment Effects [62.44901952244514]
  The conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is the best point prediction of individual causal effects. In aggregate analyses, this is usually addressed by measuring distributional treatment effect (DTE) We provide a new robust and model-agnostic methodology for learning the conditional DTE (CDTE) for a wide class of problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T17:40:31Z)
• Assessment of Treatment Effect Estimators for Heavy-Tailed Data [70.72363097550483]
  A central obstacle in the objective assessment of treatment effect (TE) estimators in randomized control trials (RCTs) is the lack of ground truth (or validation set) to test their performance. We provide a novel cross-validation-like methodology to address this challenge. We evaluate our methodology across 709 RCTs implemented in the Amazon supply chain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-14T17:53:01Z)
• Median Optimal Treatment Regimes [7.241149193573696]
  We propose a new median optimal treatment regime that treats individuals whose conditional median is higher under treatment. This ensures that optimal decisions for individuals from the same group are not overly influenced by a small fraction of the group. We introduce a new measure of value, the Average Conditional Median Effect (ACME), which summarizes across-group median treatment outcomes of a policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-02T15:26:20Z)
• Bayesian prognostic covariate adjustment [59.75318183140857]
  Historical data about disease outcomes can be integrated into the analysis of clinical trials in many ways. We build on existing literature that uses prognostic scores from a predictive model to increase the efficiency of treatment effect estimates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-24T05:19:03Z)
• Increasing the efficiency of randomized trial estimates via linear adjustment for a prognostic score [59.75318183140857]
  Estimating causal effects from randomized experiments is central to clinical research. Most methods for historical borrowing achieve reductions in variance by sacrificing strict type-I error rate control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-17T21:10:10Z)

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.