Estimating dynamic treatment regimes for ordinal outcomes with household interference: Application in household smoking cessation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of precision medicine is on decision support, often in the form of dynamic treatment regimes, which are sequences of decision rules. At each decision point, the decision rules determine the next treatment according to the patient's baseline characteristics, the information on treatments and responses accrued by that point, and the patient's current health status, including symptom severity and other measures. However, dynamic treatment regime estimation with ordinal outcomes is rarely studied, and rarer still in the context of interference - where one patient's treatment may affect another's outcome. In this paper, we introduce the weighted proportional odds model: a regression based, approximate doubly-robust approach to single-stage dynamic treatment regime estimation for ordinal outcomes. This method also accounts for the possibility of interference between individuals sharing a household through the use of covariate balancing weights derived from joint propensity scores. Examining different types of balancing weights, we verify the approximate double robustness of weighted proportional odds model with our adjusted weights via simulation studies. We further extend weighted proportional odds model to multi-stage dynamic treatment regime estimation with household interference, namely dynamic weighted proportional odds model. Lastly, we demonstrate our proposed methodology in the analysis of longitudinal survey data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study, which motivates this work. Furthermore, considering interference, we provide optimal treatment strategies for households to achieve smoking cessation of the pair in the household.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".