Comparison of statistical approaches dealing with time-dependent confounding in drug effectiveness studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In longitudinal studies, if the time-dependent covariates are affected by the past treatment, time-dependent confounding may be present. For a time-to-event response, marginal structural Cox models are frequently used to deal with such confounding. To avoid some of the problems of fitting marginal structural Cox model, the sequential Cox approach has been suggested as an alternative. Although the estimation mechanisms are different, both approaches claim to estimate the causal effect of treatment by appropriately adjusting for time-dependent confounding. We carry out simulation studies to assess the suitability of the sequential Cox approach for analyzing time-to-event data in the presence of a time-dependent covariate that may or may not be a time-dependent confounder. Results from these simulations revealed that the sequential Cox approach is not as effective as marginal structural Cox model in addressing the time-dependent confounding. The sequential Cox approach was also found to be inadequate in the presence of a time-dependent covariate. We propose a modified version of the sequential Cox approach that correctly estimates the treatment effect in both of the above scenarios. All approaches are applied to investigate the impact of beta-interferon treatment in delaying disability progression in the British Columbia Multiple Sclerosis cohort (1995-2008).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.141 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".