Joint mixed-effects models for causal inference in clustered network-based observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Causal inference on populations embedded in social networks poses technical challenges, since the typical no interference assumption frequently does not hold. Existing methods developed in the context of network interference rely upon the assumption of no unmeasured confounding. However, when faced with multilevel network data, there may be a latent factor influencing both the exposure and the outcome at the cluster level. We propose a Bayesian inference approach that combines a joint mixed-effects model for the outcome and the exposure with direct standardization to identify and estimate causal effects in the presence of network interference and unmeasured cluster confounding. In simulations, we compare our proposed method with linear mixed and fixed effects models and show that unbiased estimation is achieved using the joint model. Having derived valid tools for estimation, we examine the effect of maternal college education on adolescent school performance using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.
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 | 0.066 | 0.178 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 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".