Variable Selection in Regression-Based Estimation of Dynamic Treatment Regimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) consist of a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of intervention, that aim to recommend effective treatments for individual patients according to patient information history. DTRs can be estimated from models which include interactions between treatment and a (typically small) number of covariates which are often chosen a priori. However, with increasingly large and complex data being collected, it can be difficult to know which prognostic factors might be relevant in the treatment rule. Therefore, a more data-driven approach to select these covariates might improve the estimated decision rules and simplify models to make them easier to interpret. We propose a variable selection method for DTR estimation using penalized dynamic weighted least squares. Our method has the strong heredity property, that is, an interaction term can be included in the model only if the corresponding main terms have also been selected. We show our method has both the double robustness property and the oracle property theoretically; and the newly proposed method compares favorably with other variable selection approaches in numerical studies. We further illustrate the proposed method on data from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression study.
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 | 0.023 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; 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".