Estimating causal effects in a target population with unmeasured confounders is challenging, especially when instrumental variables (IVs) are unavailable. However, IVs from auxiliary populations with similar problems can help infer causal effects in the target population. While the homogeneous conditional average treatment effect assumption has been widely used for effect transportability, it has not been explored in IV-based data fusion. We include it as a basic approach, though it may be biased when treatment effect heterogeneity exists. As an alternative approach, we introduce the equi-confounding assumption that the unmeasured confounding bias remains the same after adjusting for observed covariates, while allowing conditional average treatment effects to differ across populations. This allows us to identify the confounding bias in the auxiliary population and remove it from the treatment-outcome association in the target population to recover the causal effect. We develop multiply robust estimators under both approaches and demonstrate them through simulation studies and a real data application.
Identifying Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables from the Auxiliary Dataset
Peking University（北京大学）；Beijing Technology and Business University（北京工商大学）；Center for Applied Statistics and School of Statistics, Renmin University of China（中国人民大学应用统计学院和统计学院）
Instrumental variable methods have been widely used to identify causal effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding. A key identification condition known as the exclusion restriction states that the instrument cannot have a direct effect on the outcome which is not mediated by the exposure in view. In the health and social sciences, such an assumption is often not credible. To address this concern, we consider identification conditions of the population average treatment effect with an invalid instrumental variable which does not satisfy the exclusion restriction, and derive the efficient…
University of Pennsylvania（宾夕法尼亚大学）；University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign（伊利诺伊大学厄巴纳-香槟分校）；Washington University in St. Louis（圣路易斯华盛顿大学）；Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health（哈佛大学陈曾熙公共卫生学院）
There is a fast-growing literature on estimating optimal treatment regimes based on randomized trials or observational studies under a key identifying condition of no unmeasured confounding. Because confounding by unmeasured factors cannot generally be ruled out with certainty in observational studies or randomized trials subject to noncompliance, we propose a general instrumental variable approach to learning optimal treatment regimes under endogeneity. Specifically, we establish identification of both value function $E[Y_{\mathcal{D}(L)}]$ for a given regime $\mathcal{D}$ and optimal regimes…
Testing the Validity of Instrumental Variable Sets in Causal Additive Models with Non-Constant Effects
Beijing Technology and Business University（北京工商大学）；Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences（中国科学院深圳先进技术研究院）；Peking University（北京大学）；Guangdong University of Technology（广东工业大学）；Peng Cheng Laboratory（鹏城实验室）；Carnegie Mellon University（卡内基梅隆大学）；Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence（穆罕默德·本·扎耶德人工智能大学）
Unmeasured confounding is a key threat to reliable causal inference based on observational studies. Motivated from two powerful natural experiment devices, the instrumental variables and difference-in-differences, we propose a new method called instrumented difference-in-differences that explicitly leverages exogenous randomness in an exposure trend to estimate the average and conditional average treatment effect in the presence of unmeasured confounding. We develop the identification assumptions using the potential outcomes framework. We propose a Wald estimator and a class of multiply robust…
In observational studies, instrumental variable (IV) methods are commonly applied when there exists some unmeasured covariates. In Mendelian Randomization (MR), constructing an allele score by using many single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) is often implemented; however, there are risks estimating biased causal effects by including some invalid IVs. Invalid IVs are candidates of IVs associated with some unobserved variables. To solve this problem, we propose a novel strategy in this paper: using Negative Control Outcomes (NCOs) as auxiliary variables. By using NCOs, we can essentialy select …
Improving Mendelian Randomization Analysis by Instrument Borrowing from Auxiliary Outcome Traits
Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health（约翰斯·霍普金斯彭博公共卫生学院生物统计系）；Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University（约翰斯·霍普金斯大学医学院肿瘤系）
Identification of treatment effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding is a persistent problem in the social, biological, and medical sciences. The problem of unmeasured confounding in settings with multiple treatments is most common in statistical genetics and bioinformatics settings, where researchers have developed many successful statistical strategies without engaging deeply with the causal aspects of the problem. Recently there have been a number of attempts to bridge the gap between these statistical approaches and causal inference, but these attempts have either been shown to be…
Munich Center for Machine Learning（慕尼黑机器学习中心）；LMU Munich（慕尼黑大学）
Estimating conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) from observational data is relevant in many fields such as personalized medicine. However, in practice, the treatment assignment is usually confounded by unobserved variables and thus introduces bias. A remedy to remove the bias is the use of instrumental variables (IVs). Such settings are widespread in medicine (e.g., trials where the treatment assignment is used as binary IV). In this paper, we propose a novel, multiply robust machine learning framework, called MRIV, for estimating CATEs using binary IVs and thus yield an unbiased CATE…
The front-door criterion can be used to identify and compute causal effects despite the existence of unmeasured confounders between a treatment and outcome. However, the key assumptions -- (i) the existence of a variable (or set of variables) that fully mediates the effect of the treatment on the outcome, and (ii) which simultaneously does not suffer from similar issues of confounding as the treatment-outcome pair -- are often deemed implausible. This paper explores the testability of these assumptions. We show that under mild conditions involving an auxiliary variable, the assumptions encoded…
Instituto de Ciencias Matemáticas, CSIC（西班牙科学研究所数学科学研究所）；Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid（马德里自治大学数学系）；Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley（加州大学伯克利分校生物统计学部）
