Machine Learning for Causal Inference: On the Use of Cross-fit Estimators

被引:52
作者
Zivich, Paul N. [1 ,2 ]
Breskin, Alexander [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Chapel Hill, NC 27516 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Carolina Populat Ctr, Chapel Hill, NC 27516 USA
[3] NoviSci, Durham, NC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Causal inference; Epidemiologic methods; Machine learning; Observational studies; Super-learner; DOUBLY ROBUST ESTIMATION; PROPENSITY SCORE; ORDER; POPULATION; POSITIVITY; NETWORKS; MODELS; TIME;
D O I
10.1097/EDE.0000000000001332
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Modern causal inference methods allow machine learning to be used to weaken parametric modeling assumptions. However, the use of machine learning may result in complications for inference. Doubly robust cross-fit estimators have been proposed to yield better statistical properties. Methods: We conducted a simulation study to assess the performance of several different estimators for the average causal effect. The data generating mechanisms for the simulated treatment and outcome included log-transforms, polynomial terms, and discontinuities. We compared singly robust estimators (g-computation, inverse probability weighting) and doubly robust estimators (augmented inverse probability weighting, targeted maximum likelihood estimation). We estimated nuisance functions with parametric models and ensemble machine learning separately. We further assessed doubly robust cross-fit estimators. Results: With correctly specified parametric models, all of the estimators were unbiased and confidence intervals achieved nominal coverage. When used with machine learning, the doubly robust cross-fit estimators substantially outperformed all of the other estimators in terms of bias, variance, and confidence interval coverage. Conclusions: Due to the difficulty of properly specifying parametric models in high-dimensional data, doubly robust estimators with ensemble learning and cross-fitting may be the preferred approach for estimation of the average causal effect in most epidemiologic studies. However, these approaches may require larger sample sizes to avoid finite-sample issues.
引用
收藏
页码:393 / 401
页数:9
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects [J].
Athey, Susan ;
Imbens, Guido .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2016, 113 (27) :7353-7360
[2]   Understanding and diagnosing the potential for bias when using machine learning methods with doubly robust causal estimators [J].
Bahamyirou, Asma ;
Blais, Lucie ;
Forget, Amelie ;
Schnitzer, Mireille E. .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (06) :1637-1650
[3]   Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models [J].
Bang, H .
BIOMETRICS, 2005, 61 (04) :962-972
[4]   What is Machine Learning? A Primer for the Epidemiologist [J].
Bi, Qifang ;
Goodman, Katherine E. ;
Kaminsky, Joshua ;
Lessler, Justin .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 188 (12) :2222-2239
[5]   ON ADAPTIVE ESTIMATION [J].
BICKEL, PJ .
ANNALS OF STATISTICS, 1982, 10 (03) :647-671
[6]  
BICKEL PJ, 1988, SANKHYA SER A, V50, P381
[7]   Random forests [J].
Breiman, L .
MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) :5-32
[8]   Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters [J].
Chernozhukov, Victor ;
Chetverikov, Denis ;
Demirer, Mert ;
Duflo, Esther ;
Hansen, Christian ;
Newey, Whitney ;
Robins, James .
ECONOMETRICS JOURNAL, 2018, 21 (01) :C1-C68
[9]   The Consistency Statement in Causal Inference A Definition or an Assumption? [J].
Cole, Stephen R. ;
Frangakis, Constantine E. .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 20 (01) :3-5
[10]   On the use of generalized additive models in time-series studies of air pollution and health [J].
Dominici, F ;
McDermott, A ;
Zeger, SL ;
Samet, JM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2002, 156 (03) :193-203