IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v79y2023i4p3418-3430.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Longitudinal incremental propensity score interventions for limited resource settings

Author

Listed:
  • Aaron L. Sarvet
  • Kerollos N. Wanis
  • Jessica G. Young
  • Roberto Hernandez‐Alejandro
  • Mats J. Stensrud

Abstract

Many real‐life treatments are of limited supply and cannot be provided to all individuals in the population. For example, patients on the liver transplant waiting list usually cannot be assigned a liver transplant immediately at the time they reach highest priority because a suitable organ is not immediately available. In settings with limited supply, investigators are often interested in the effects of treatment strategies in which a limited proportion of patients receive an organ at a given time, that is, treatment regimes satisfying resource constraints. Here, we describe an estimand that allows us to define causal effects of treatment strategies that satisfy resource constraints: incremental propensity score interventions (IPSIs) for limited resources. IPSIs flexibly constrain time‐varying resource utilization through proportional scaling of patients' natural propensities for treatment, thereby preserving existing propensity rank ordering compared to the status quo. We derive a simple class of inverse‐probability‐weighted estimators, and we apply one such estimator to evaluate the effect of restricting or expanding utilization of “increased risk” liver organs to treat patients with end‐stage liver disease.

Suggested Citation

  • Aaron L. Sarvet & Kerollos N. Wanis & Jessica G. Young & Roberto Hernandez‐Alejandro & Mats J. Stensrud, 2023. "Longitudinal incremental propensity score interventions for limited resource settings," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3418-3430, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:79:y:2023:i:4:p:3418-3430
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.13859
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13859
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.13859?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van der Laan Mark J. & Rubin Daniel, 2006. "Targeted Maximum Likelihood Learning," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-40, December.
    2. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    3. Edward H. Kennedy, 2019. "Nonparametric Causal Effects Based on Incremental Propensity Score Interventions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 114(526), pages 645-656, April.
    4. Masayuki Henmi & Shinto Eguchi, 2004. "A paradox concerning nuisance parameters and projected estimating functions," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 91(4), pages 929-941, December.
    5. Luedtke Alexander R. & van der Laan Mark J., 2016. "Optimal Individualized Treatments in Resource-Limited Settings," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 283-303, May.
    6. Jeffrey A. Boatman & David M. Vock, 2018. "Estimating the causal effect of treatment regimes for organ transplantation," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 1407-1416, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Victor Quintas-Martinez & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2021. "Automatic Debiased Machine Learning via Riesz Regression," Papers 2104.14737, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    2. Michael Lechner, 2023. "Causal Machine Learning and its use for public policy," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 159(1), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Jelena Bradic & Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Yinchu Zhu, 2019. "Minimax Semiparametric Learning With Approximate Sparsity," Papers 1912.12213, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    4. Alex Chin & Dean Eckles & Johan Ugander, 2022. "Evaluating Stochastic Seeding Strategies in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1714-1736, March.
    5. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Christian Hansen & Whitney Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-68, February.
    6. Iván Díaz & Nima S. Hejazi, 2020. "Causal mediation analysis for stochastic interventions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 82(3), pages 661-683, July.
    7. Masahiro Kato & Masatoshi Uehara & Shota Yasui, 2020. "Off-Policy Evaluation and Learning for External Validity under a Covariate Shift," Papers 2002.11642, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    8. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Rahul Singh, 2022. "Automatic Debiased Machine Learning of Causal and Structural Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 967-1027, May.
    9. Zhen Li & Jie Chen & Eric Laber & Fang Liu & Richard Baumgartner, 2023. "Optimal Treatment Regimes: A Review and Empirical Comparison," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(3), pages 427-463, December.
    10. Yi Zhang & Kosuke Imai, 2023. "Individualized Policy Evaluation and Learning under Clustered Network Interference," Papers 2311.02467, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    11. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    12. S Ariane Christie & Amanda S Conroy & Rachael A Callcut & Alan E Hubbard & Mitchell J Cohen, 2019. "Dynamic multi-outcome prediction after injury: Applying adaptive machine learning for precision medicine in trauma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, April.
    13. Waverly Wei & Maya Petersen & Mark J van der Laan & Zeyu Zheng & Chong Wu & Jingshen Wang, 2023. "Efficient targeted learning of heterogeneous treatment effects for multiple subgroups," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 1934-1946, September.
    14. Manski, Charles F., 2023. "Probabilistic prediction for binary treatment choice: With focus on personalized medicine," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 647-663.
    15. Yan Liu, 2022. "Policy Learning under Endogeneity Using Instrumental Variables," Papers 2206.09883, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    16. Michael Rosenblum & Nicholas P. Jewell & Mark van der Laan & Stephen Shiboski & Ariane van der Straten & Nancy Padian, 2009. "Analysing direct effects in randomized trials with secondary interventions: an application to human immunodeficiency virus prevention trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 172(2), pages 443-465, April.
    17. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Gobillon, Laurent & Zylberberg, Yanos, 2022. "Urban economics in a historical perspective: Recovering data with machine learning," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Luo, Yu & Graham, Daniel J. & McCoy, Emma J., 2023. "Semiparametric Bayesian doubly robust causal estimation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Garbero, Alessandra & Sakos, Grayson & Cerulli, Giovanni, 2023. "Towards data-driven project design: Providing optimal treatment rules for development projects," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Paul Frédéric Blanche & Anders Holt & Thomas Scheike, 2023. "On logistic regression with right censored data, with or without competing risks, and its use for estimating treatment effects," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 441-482, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:79:y:2023:i:4:p:3418-3430. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0006-341X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.