The application of target trials with longitudinal targeted maximum likelihood estimation to assess the effect of alcohol consumption in adolescence on depressive symptoms in adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time-varying confounding is a common challenge for causal inference in observational studies with time-varying treatments, long follow-up periods, and participant dropout. Confounder adjustment using traditional approaches can be limited by data sparsity, weight instability, and computational issues. The Nicotine Dependence in Teens Study is a prospective cohort study, and we used data from 21 data collection cycles carried out from 1999 to 2008 among 1294 students recruited from 10 high schools in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, including follow-up into adulthood. Our aim in this study was to estimate associations of timing of alcohol initiation and cumulative duration of alcohol use with depression symptoms in adulthood. Based on the target trials framework, we defined intention-to-treat and as-treated parameters in a marginal structural model with sex as a potential effect-modifier. We then used the observational data to emulate the trials. For estimation, we used pooled longitudinal target maximum likelihood estimation, a plug-in estimator with double-robust and local efficiency properties. We describe strategies for dealing with high-dimensional potential drinking patterns and practical positivity violations due to a long follow-up time, including modifying the effect of interest by removing sparsely observed drinking patterns from the loss function and applying longitudinal modified treatment policies to represent the effect of discouraging drinking.
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 | 0.246 | 0.457 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".