Estimating what would be an individual's potential response to varying levels of exposure to a treatment is of high practical relevance for several important fields, such as healthcare, economics and public policy. However, existing methods for learning to estimate counterfactual outcomes from observational data are either focused on estimating average dose-response curves, or limited to settings with only two treatments that do not have an associated dosage parameter. Here, we present a novel machine-learning approach towards learning counterfactual representations for estimating individual dose-response curves for any number of treatments with continuous dosage parameters with neural networks. Building on the established potential outcomes framework, we introduce performance metrics, model selection criteria, model architectures, and open benchmarks for estimating individual dose-response curves. Our experiments show that the methods developed in this work set a new state-of-the-art in estimating individual dose-response.
Causal analysis of treatment effects with rigorous experiments is, in many domains, an essential tool for validating interventions. In medicine, prospective experiments, such as RCTs, are the de facto gold standard to evaluate whether a given treatment is efficacious in treating a specific indication across a population @cite_11 @cite_7 . However, performing prospective experiments is expensive, time-consuming, and often not possible for ethical reasons @cite_18 . Historically, there has therefore been considerable interest in developing methodologies for performing causal inference using readily available observational data @cite_27 @cite_24 @cite_19 @cite_15 @cite_1 @cite_33 @cite_17 . The na "ive approach of training supervised models to minimise the observed factual error is in general not a suitable choice for counterfactual inference tasks due to treatment assignment bias and the inability to observe counterfactual outcomes. To address the shortcomings of unsupervised and supervised learning in this setting, several adaptations to established machine-learning methods that aim to enable the estimation of counterfactual outcomes from observational data have recently been proposed @cite_38 @cite_21 @cite_0 @cite_39 @cite_35 @cite_30 @cite_23 @cite_36 . In this work, we build on several of these advances to develop a novel machine-learning framework for estimating individual dose-response.
@cite_30 @cite_38 @cite_18 @cite_35 @cite_33 @cite_7 @cite_36 @cite_21 @cite_1 @cite_17 @cite_39 @cite_24 @cite_19 @cite_27 @cite_0 @cite_23 @cite_15 @cite_11
2716974933 2964115178 1957379630 2138290169
We propose a novel approach for inferring the individualized causal effects of a treatment (intervention) from observational data. Our approach conceptualizes causal inference as a multitask learning problem; we model a subject's potential outcomes using a deep multitask network with a set of shared layers among the factual and counterfactual outcomes, and a set of outcome-specific layers. The impact of selection bias in the observational data is alleviated via a propensity-dropout regularization scheme, in which the network is thinned for every training example via a dropout probability that depends on the associated propensity score. The network is trained in alternating phases, where in each phase we use the training examples of one of the two potential outcomes (treated and control populations) to update the weights of the shared layers and the respective outcome-specific layers. Experiments conducted on data based on a real-world observational study show that our algorithm outperforms the state-of-the-art. Predicated on the increasing abundance of electronic health records, we investigate the problem of inferring individualized treatment effects using observational data. Stemming from the potential outcomes model, we propose a novel multi-task learning framework in which factual and counterfactual outcomes are modeled as the outputs of a function in a vector-valued reproducing kernel Hilbert space (vvRKHS). We develop a nonparametric Bayesian method for learning the treatment effects using a multi-task Gaussian process (GP) with a linear coregionalization kernel as a prior over the vvRKHS. The Bayesian approach allows us to compute individualized measures of confidence in our estimates via pointwise credible intervals, which are crucial for realizing the full potential of precision medicine. The impact of selection bias is alleviated via a risk-based empirical Bayes method for adapting the multi-task GP prior, which jointly minimizes the empirical error in factual outcomes and the uncertainty in (unobserved) counterfactual outcomes. We conduct experiments on observational datasets for an interventional social program applied to premature infants, and a left ventricular assist device applied to cardiac patients wait-listed for a heart transplant. In both experiments, we show that our method significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the most effective approach to causal discovery, but in many circumstances it is impossible to conduct RCTs. Therefore, observational studies based on passively observed data are widely accepted as an alternative to RCTs. However, in observational studies, prior knowledge is required to generate the hypotheses about the cause-effect relationships to be tested, and hence they can only be applied to problems with available domain knowledge and a handful of variables. In practice, many datasets are of high dimensionality, which leaves observational studies out of the opportunities for causal discovery from such a wealth of data sources. In another direction, many efficient data mining methods have been developed to identify associations among variables in large datasets. The problem is that causal relationships imply associations, but the reverse is not always true. However, we can see the synergy between the two paradigms here. Specifically, association rule mining can be used to deal with the high-dimensionality problem, whereas observational studies can be utilised to eliminate noncausal associations. In this article, we propose the concept of causal rules (CRs) and develop an algorithm for mining CRs in large datasets. We use the idea of retrospective cohort studies to detect CRs based on the results of association rule mining. Experiments with both synthetic and real-world datasets have demonstrated the effectiveness and efficiency of CR mining. In comparison with the commonly used causal discovery methods, the proposed approach generally is faster and has better or competitive performance in finding correct or sensible causes. It is also capable of finding a cause consisting of multiple variables—a feature that other causal discovery methods do not possess. Abstract We outline a framework for causal inference in settings where assignment to a binary treatment is ignorable, but compliance with the assignment is not perfect so that the receipt of treatment is nonignorable. To address the problems associated with comparing subjects by the ignorable assignment—an “intention-to-treat analysis”—we make use of instrumental variables, which have long been used by economists in the context of regression models with constant treatment effects. We show that the instrumental variables (IV) estimand can be embedded within the Rubin Causal Model (RCM) and that under some simple and easily interpretable assumptions, the IV estimand is the average causal effect for a subgroup of units, the compliers. Without these assumptions, the IV estimand is simply the ratio of intention-to-treat causal estimands with no interpretation as an average causal effect. The advantages of embedding the IV approach in the RCM are that it clarifies the nature of critical assumptions needed for a...