IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/102107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A sparse random projection-based test for overall qualitative treatment effects

Author

Listed:
  • Shi, Chengchun
  • Lu, Wenbin
  • Song, Rui

Abstract

In contrast to the classical “one-size-fits-all” approach, precision medicine proposes the customization of individualized treatment regimes to account for patients’ heterogeneity in response to treatments. Most of existing works in the literature focused on estimating optimal individualized treatment regimes. However, there has been less attention devoted to hypothesis testing regarding the existence of overall qualitative treatment effects, especially when there are a large number of prognostic covariates. When covariates do not have qualitative treatment effects, the optimal treatment regime will assign the same treatment to all patients regardless of their covariate values. In this article, we consider testing the overall qualitative treatment effects of patients’ prognostic covariates in a high-dimensional setting. We propose a sample splitting method to construct the test statistic, based on a nonparametric estimator of the contrast function. When the dimension of covariates is large, we construct the test based on sparse random projections of covariates into a low-dimensional space. We prove the consistency of our test statistic. In the regular cases, we show the asymptotic power function of our test statistic is asymptotically the same as the “oracle” test statistic which is constructed based on the “optimal” projection matrix. Simulation studies and real data applications validate our theoretical findings. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

Suggested Citation

  • Shi, Chengchun & Lu, Wenbin & Song, Rui, 2019. "A sparse random projection-based test for overall qualitative treatment effects," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102107, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:102107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102107/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baqun Zhang & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Eric B. Laber & Marie Davidian, 2012. "A Robust Method for Estimating Optimal Treatment Regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1010-1018, December.
    2. Minsu Chang & Sokbae Lee & Yoon‐Jae Whang, 2015. "Nonparametric tests of conditional treatment effects with an application to single‐sex schooling on academic achievements," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 18(3), pages 307-346, October.
    3. Fan J. & Li R., 2001. "Variable Selection via Nonconcave Penalized Likelihood and its Oracle Properties," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 1348-1360, December.
    4. Yingqi Zhao & Donglin Zeng & A. John Rush & Michael R. Kosorok, 2012. "Estimating Individualized Treatment Rules Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(499), pages 1106-1118, September.
    5. Belloni, Alexandre & Chernozhukov, Victor & Chetverikov, Denis & Kato, Kengo, 2015. "Some new asymptotic theory for least squares series: Pointwise and uniform results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 345-366.
    6. Xianyang Zhang & Guang Cheng, 2017. "Simultaneous Inference for High-Dimensional Linear Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 757-768, April.
    7. Yu‐Chin Hsu, 2017. "Consistent tests for conditional treatment effects," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 20(1), pages 1-22, February.
    8. Stuart G. Baker & Nancy R. Cook & Andrew Vickers & Barnett S. Kramer, 2009. "Using relative utility curves to evaluate risk prediction," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 172(4), pages 729-748, October.
    9. S. A. Murphy, 2003. "Optimal dynamic treatment regimes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(2), pages 331-355, May.
    10. Yichi Zhang & Eric B. Laber & Anastasios Tsiatis & Marie Davidian, 2015. "Using decision lists to construct interpretable and parsimonious treatment regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 895-904, 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. Ruoqing Zhu & Ying-Qi Zhao & Guanhua Chen & Shuangge Ma & Hongyu Zhao, 2017. "Greedy outcome weighted tree learning of optimal personalized treatment rules," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 391-400, June.
    2. Hongming Pu & Bo Zhang, 2021. "Estimating optimal treatment rules with an instrumental variable: A partial identification learning approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(2), pages 318-345, April.
    3. Shi, Chengchun & Wan, Runzhe & Song, Ge & Luo, Shikai & Zhu, Hongtu & Song, Rui, 2023. "A multiagent reinforcement learning framework for off-policy evaluation in two-sided markets," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117174, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. 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.
    5. Q. Clairon & R. Henderson & N. J. Young & E. D. Wilson & C. J. Taylor, 2021. "Adaptive treatment and robust control," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 223-236, March.
    6. Xin Qiu & Donglin Zeng & Yuanjia Wang, 2018. "Estimation and evaluation of linear individualized treatment rules to guarantee performance," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 517-528, June.
    7. Weibin Mo & Yufeng Liu, 2022. "Efficient learning of optimal individualized treatment rules for heteroscedastic or misspecified treatment‐free effect models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 440-472, April.
    8. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brian C. Sauer & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & William S. Weintraub & Andrew E. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "Estimating the optimal individualized treatment rule from a cost‐effectiveness perspective," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 337-351, March.
    9. Adam Ciarleglio & Eva Petkova & Todd Ogden & Thaddeus Tarpey, 2018. "Constructing treatment decision rules based on scalar and functional predictors when moderators of treatment effect are unknown," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(5), pages 1331-1356, November.
    10. Wei Liu & Zhiwei Zhang & Lei Nie & Guoxing Soon, 2017. "A Case Study in Personalized Medicine: Rilpivirine Versus Efavirenz for Treatment-Naive HIV Patients," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(520), pages 1381-1392, October.
    11. Kara E. Rudolph & Iván Díaz, 2022. "When the ends do not justify the means: Learning who is predicted to have harmful indirect effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(S2), pages 573-589, December.
    12. Shuai Chen & Lu Tian & Tianxi Cai & Menggang Yu, 2017. "A general statistical framework for subgroup identification and comparative treatment scoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1199-1209, December.
    13. Yaoyao Xu & Menggang Yu & Ying‐Qi Zhao & Quefeng Li & Sijian Wang & Jun Shao, 2015. "Regularized outcome weighted subgroup identification for differential treatment effects," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 645-653, September.
    14. Muxuan Liang & Menggang Yu, 2023. "Relative contrast estimation and inference for treatment recommendation," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2920-2932, December.
    15. Xinyang Huang & Jin Xu, 2020. "Estimating individualized treatment rules with risk constraint," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 1310-1318, December.
    16. Xin Chen & Rui Song & Jiajia Zhang & Swann Arp Adams & Liuquan Sun & Wenbin Lu, 2022. "On estimating optimal regime for treatment initiation time based on restricted mean residual lifetime," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1377-1389, December.
    17. Giorgos Bakoyannis, 2023. "Estimating optimal individualized treatment rules with multistate processes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2830-2842, December.
    18. Shi, Chengchun & Song, Rui & Lu, Wenbin, 2016. "Robust learning for optimal treatment decision with NP-dimensionality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102114, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Qian Guan & Eric B. Laber & Brian J. Reich, 2016. "Comment," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(515), pages 936-942, July.
    20. Cai, Hengrui & Shi, Chengchun & Song, Rui & Lu, Wenbin, 2023. "Jump interval-learning for individualized decision making with continuous treatments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118231, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    high-dimensional testing; optimal treatment regime; precision medicine; qualitative treatment effects; sparse random projection;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:102107. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.