IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v79y2023i2p1409-1419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing intervention effects in a randomized trial within a social network

Author

Listed:
  • Shaina J. Alexandria
  • Michael G. Hudgens
  • Allison E. Aiello

Abstract

Studies of social networks provide unique opportunities to assess the causal effects of interventions that may impact more of the population than just those intervened on directly. Such effects are sometimes called peer or spillover effects, and may exist in the presence of interference, that is, when one individual's treatment affects another individual's outcome. Randomization‐based inference (RI) methods provide a theoretical basis for causal inference in randomized studies, even in the presence of interference. In this article, we consider RI of the intervention effect in the eX‐FLU trial, a randomized study designed to assess the effect of a social distancing intervention on influenza‐like‐illness transmission in a connected network of college students. The approach considered enables inference about the effect of the social distancing intervention on the per‐contact probability of influenza‐like‐illness transmission in the observed network. The methods allow for interference between connected individuals and for heterogeneous treatment effects. The proposed methods are evaluated empirically via simulation studies, and then applied to data from the eX‐FLU trial.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaina J. Alexandria & Michael G. Hudgens & Allison E. Aiello, 2023. "Assessing intervention effects in a randomized trial within a social network," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 1409-1419, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:79:y:2023:i:2:p:1409-1419
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.13606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13606
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.13606?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. Eckles Dean & Karrer Brian & Ugander Johan, 2017. "Design and Analysis of Experiments in Networks: Reducing Bias from Interference," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Sobel, Michael E., 2006. "What Do Randomized Studies of Housing Mobility Demonstrate?: Causal Inference in the Face of Interference," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 1398-1407, December.
    3. Halloran M. Elizabeth & Hudgens Michael G., 2012. "Causal Inference for Vaccine Effects on Infectiousness," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 1-40, January.
    4. Bowers, Jake & Fredrickson, Mark M. & Aronow, Peter M., 2016. "Research Note: A More Powerful Test Statistic for Reasoning about Interference between Units," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 395-403, July.
    5. Luke Keele & Luke Miratrix, 2019. "Randomization Inference for Outcomes with Clumping at Zero," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(2), pages 141-150, April.
    6. Wen Wei Loh & Michael G. Hudgens & John D. Clemens & Mohammad Ali & Michael E. Emch, 2020. "Randomization inference with general interference and censoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(1), pages 235-245, March.
    7. Bowers, Jake & Fredrickson, Mark M. & Panagopoulos, Costas, 2013. "Reasoning about Interference Between Units: A General Framework," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 97-124, January.
    8. Jason Wu & Peng Ding, 2021. "Randomization Tests for Weak Null Hypotheses in Randomized Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 116(536), pages 1898-1913, October.
    9. Rosenbaum, Paul R., 2007. "Interference Between Units in Randomized Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 191-200, March.
    10. L. Liu & M. G. Hudgens & S. Becker-Dreps, 2016. "On inverse probability-weighted estimators in the presence of interference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 103(4), pages 829-842.
    11. Laura Forastiere & Edoardo M. Airoldi & Fabrizia Mealli, 2021. "Identification and Estimation of Treatment and Interference Effects in Observational Studies on Networks," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 116(534), pages 901-918, April.
    12. G W Basse & A Feller & P Toulis, 2019. "Randomization tests of causal effects under interference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 106(2), pages 487-494.
    13. Hudgens, Michael G. & Halloran, M. Elizabeth, 2008. "Toward Causal Inference With Interference," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 832-842, June.
    14. Donald B. Rubin, 2005. "Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 322-331, March.
    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. Elizabeth L. Ogburn & Ilya Shpitser & Youjin Lee, 2020. "Causal inference, social networks and chain graphs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1659-1676, October.
    2. Zhaonan Qu & Ruoxuan Xiong & Jizhou Liu & Guido Imbens, 2021. "Efficient Treatment Effect Estimation in Observational Studies under Heterogeneous Partial Interference," Papers 2107.12420, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    3. Ariel Boyarsky & Hongseok Namkoong & Jean Pouget-Abadie, 2023. "Modeling Interference Using Experiment Roll-out," Papers 2305.10728, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    4. Sujatro Chakladar & Samuel Rosin & Michael G. Hudgens & M. Elizabeth Halloran & John D. Clemens & Mohammad Ali & Michael E. Emch, 2022. "Inverse probability weighted estimators of vaccine effects accommodating partial interference and censoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 777-788, June.
    5. Karlsson, Maria & Lundin, Mathias, 2016. "On statistical methods for labor market evaluation under interference between units," Working Paper Series 2016:24, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    6. C. Tort`u & I. Crimaldi & F. Mealli & L. Forastiere, 2020. "Modelling Network Interference with Multi-valued Treatments: the Causal Effect of Immigration Policy on Crime Rates," Papers 2003.10525, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    7. Denis Fougère & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2020. "Policy Evaluation Using Causal Inference Methods," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03455978, HAL.
    8. Giulio Grossi & Marco Mariani & Alessandra Mattei & Patrizia Lattarulo & Ozge Oner, 2020. "Direct and spillover effects of a new tramway line on the commercial vitality of peripheral streets. A synthetic-control approach," Papers 2004.05027, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    9. Chiba, Yasutaka, 2012. "A note on bounds for the causal infectiousness effect in vaccine trials," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(7), pages 1422-1429.
    10. David Puelz & Guillaume Basse & Avi Feller & Panos Toulis, 2022. "A graph‐theoretic approach to randomization tests of causal effects under general interference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(1), pages 174-204, February.
    11. Stefan Wager & Kuang Xu, 2021. "Experimenting in Equilibrium," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6694-6715, November.
    12. Cai Xiaoxuan & Loh Wen Wei & Crawford Forrest W., 2021. "Identification of causal intervention effects under contagion," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 9-38, January.
    13. Kosuke Imai & Zhichao Jiang, 2020. "Identification and sensitivity analysis of contagion effects in randomized placebo‐controlled trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1637-1657, October.
    14. Anish Agarwal & Sarah H. Cen & Devavrat Shah & Christina Lee Yu, 2022. "Network Synthetic Interventions: A Causal Framework for Panel Data Under Network Interference," Papers 2210.11355, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    15. Tadao Hoshino & Takahide Yanagi, 2021. "Causal Inference with Noncompliance and Unknown Interference," Papers 2108.07455, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    16. VanderWeele Tyler J. & Hernan Miguel A., 2013. "Causal inference under multiple versions of treatment," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Fredrik Savje, 2021. "Causal inference with misspecified exposure mappings: separating definitions and assumptions," Papers 2103.06471, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    18. Gonzalo Vazquez-Bare, 2017. "Identification and Estimation of Spillover Effects in Randomized Experiments," Papers 1711.02745, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    19. Yi Zhang & Kosuke Imai, 2023. "Individualized Policy Evaluation and Learning under Clustered Network Interference," Papers 2311.02467, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    20. Giovanni Cerulli, 2014. "ntreatreg: a Stata module for estimation of treatment effects in the presence of neighborhood interactions," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2014 15, Stata Users Group.

    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:2:p:1409-1419. 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.