Optimal dynamic treatment regime estimation in the presence of nonadherence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) are sequences of functions that formalize the process of precision medicine. DTRs take as input patient information and output treatment recommendations. A major focus of the DTR literature has been on the estimation of optimal DTRs, the sequences of decision rules that result in the best outcome in expectation, across the complete population if they were to be applied. While there is a rich literature on optimal DTR estimation, to date, there has been minimal consideration of the impacts of nonadherence on these estimation procedures. Nonadherence refers to any process through which an individual's prescribed treatment does not match their true treatment. We explore the impacts of nonadherence and demonstrate that, generally, when nonadherence is ignored, suboptimal regimes will be estimated. In light of these findings, we propose a method for estimating optimal DTRs in the presence of nonadherence. The resulting estimators are consistent and asymptotically normal, with a double robustness property. Using simulations, we demonstrate the reliability of these results, and illustrate comparable performance between the proposed estimation procedure adjusting for the impacts of nonadherence and estimators that are computed on data without nonadherence.
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 | 0.018 | 0.100 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".