How Choice of Effect Measure Influences Minimally Sufficient Adjustment Sets for External Validity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiologic researchers generalizing or transporting effect estimates from a study to a target population must account for effect-measure modifiers (EMMs) on the scale of interest. However, little attention is paid to how the EMMs required may vary depending on the mathematical nuances of each effect measure. We defined 2 types of EMMs: a marginal EMM, where the effect on the scale of interest differs across levels of a variable, and a conditional EMM, where the effect differs conditional on other variables associated with the outcome. These types define 3 classes of variables: class 1 (conditional EMM), class 2 (marginal but not conditional EMM), and class 3 (neither marginal nor conditional EMM). Class 1 variables are necessary to achieve a valid estimate of the RD in a target population, while an RR requires class 1 and class 2 and an OR requires classes 1, 2, and 3 (i.e., all variables associated with the outcome). This does not mean that fewer variables are required for an externally valid RD (because variables may not modify effects on all scales), but it does suggest that researchers should consider the scale of the effect measure when identifying an EMM necessary for an externally valid treatment effect estimate.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".