An information criterion for marginal structural models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marginal structural models were developed as a semiparametric alternative to the G-computation formula to estimate causal effects of exposures. In practice, these models are often specified using parametric regression models. As such, the usual conventions regarding regression model specification apply. This paper outlines strategies for marginal structural model specification and considerations for the functional form of the exposure metric in the final structural model. We propose a quasi-likelihood information criterion adapted from use in generalized estimating equations. We evaluate the properties of our proposed information criterion using a limited simulation study. We illustrate our approach using two empirical examples. In the first example, we use data from a randomized breastfeeding promotion trial to estimate the effect of breastfeeding duration on infant weight at 1 year. In the second example, we use data from two prospective cohorts studies to estimate the effect of highly active antiretroviral therapy on CD4 count in an observational cohort of HIV-infected men and women. The marginal structural model specified should reflect the scientific question being addressed but can also assist in exploration of other plausible and closely related questions. In marginal structural models, as in any regression setting, correct inference depends on correct model specification. Our proposed information criterion provides a formal method for comparing model fit for different specifications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.034 | 0.135 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".