Related papers: Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Comparisons in M…
We provide an approach to exploratory data analysis in matched observational studies with a single intervention and multiple endpoints. In such settings, the researcher would like to explore evidence for actual treatment effects among these…
Observational studies provide invaluable opportunities to draw causal inference, but they may suffer from biases due to pretreatment difference between treated and control units. Matching is a popular approach to reduce observed covariate…
Matching is one of the most widely used study designs for adjusting for measured confounders in observational studies. However, unmeasured confounding may exist and cannot be removed by matching. Therefore, a sensitivity analysis is…
Identifying causal treatment (or exposure) effects in observational studies requires the data to satisfy the unconfoundedness assumption which is not testable using the observed data. With sensitivity analysis, one can determine how the…
Causal inference with observational studies often suffers from unmeasured confounding, yielding biased estimators based on the unconfoundedness assumption. Sensitivity analysis assesses how the causal conclusions change with respect to…
In this work, we propose an approach for assessing sensitivity to unobserved confounding in studies with multiple outcomes. We demonstrate how prior knowledge unique to the multi-outcome setting can be leveraged to strengthen causal…
Sensitivity analysis is widely used to assess the robustness of causal conclusions in observational studies, yet its interaction with the structure of measured covariates is often overlooked. When latent confounders cannot be directly…
We present a new procedure for conducting a sensitivity analysis in matched observational studies. For any candidate test statistic, the approach defines tilted modifications dependent upon the proposed strength of unmeasured confounding.…
One of the fundamental challenges in drawing causal inferences from observational studies is that the assumption of no unmeasured confounding is not testable from observed data. Therefore, assessing sensitivity to this assumption's…
Causal inference necessarily relies upon untestable assumptions; hence, it is crucial to assess the robustness of obtained results to violations of identification assumptions. However, such sensitivity analysis is only occasionally…
In the absence of a randomized experiment, a key assumption for drawing causal inference about treatment effects is the ignorable treatment assignment. Violations of the ignorability assumption may lead to biased treatment effect estimates.…
An observational study may be biased for estimating causal effects by failing to control for unmeasured confounders. This paper proposes a new quantity called the "sensitivity value", which is defined as the minimum strength of unmeasured…
Unmeasured confounding may undermine the validity of causal inference with observational studies. Sensitivity analysis provides an attractive way to partially circumvent this issue by assessing the potential influence of unmeasured…
Matched observational studies are commonly used to study treatment effects in non-randomized data. After matching for observed confounders, there could remain bias from unobserved confounders. A standard way to address this problem is to do…
Causal inference relies on the untestable assumption of no unmeasured confounding. Sensitivity analysis can be used to quantify the impact of unmeasured confounding on causal estimates. Among sensitivity analysis methods proposed in the…
Random-effects meta-analyses of observational studies can produce biased estimates if the synthesized studies are subject to unmeasured confounding. We propose sensitivity analyses quantifying the extent to which unmeasured confounding of…
In observational studies, identification of ATEs is generally achieved by assuming that the correct set of confounders has been measured and properly included in the relevant models. Because this assumption is both strong and untestable, a…
Causal conclusions from observational studies may be sensitive to unmeasured confounding. In such cases, a sensitivity analysis is often conducted, which tries to infer the minimum amount of hidden biases or the minimum strength of…
No unmeasured confounding is often assumed in estimating treatment effects in observational data when using approaches such as propensity scores and inverse probability weighting. However, in many such studies due to the limitation of the…
We develop sensitivity analyses for weak nulls in matched observational studies while allowing unit-level treatment effects to vary. The methods may be applied to studies using any optimal without-replacement matching algorithm. In contrast…