Assessing the causal effects of a stochastic intervention in time series data: are heat alerts effective in preventing deaths and hospitalizations?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The methodological development of this article is motivated by the need to address the following scientific question: does the issuance of heat alerts prevent adverse health effects? Our goal is to address this question within a causal inference framework in the context of time series data. A key challenge is that causal inference methods require the overlap assumption to hold: each unit (i.e., a day) must have a positive probability of receiving the treatment (i.e., issuing a heat alert on that day). In our motivating example, the overlap assumption is often violated: the probability of issuing a heat alert on a cooler day is near zero. To overcome this challenge, we propose a stochastic intervention for time series data which is implemented via an incremental time-varying propensity score (ItvPS). The ItvPS intervention is executed by multiplying the probability of issuing a heat alert on day $t$-conditional on past information up to day $t$-by an odds ratio $\delta_t$. First, we introduce a new class of causal estimands, which relies on the ItvPS intervention. We provide theoretical results to show that these causal estimands can be identified and estimated under a weaker version of the overlap assumption. Second, we propose nonparametric estimators based on the ItvPS and derive an upper bound for the variances of these estimators. Third, we extend this framework to multisite time series using a spatial meta-analysis approach. Fourth, we show that the proposed estimators perform well in terms of bias and root mean squared error via simulations. Finally, we apply our proposed approach to estimate the causal effects of increasing the probability of issuing heat alerts on each warm-season day in reducing deaths and hospitalizations among Medicare enrollees in 2837 US counties.
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 | 0.061 | 0.165 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".