Related papers: Minimax Rates and Adaptivity in Combining Experime…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly prevalent in education research, and are often regarded as a gold standard of causal inference. Two main virtues of randomized experiments are that they (1) do not suffer from…

Data from both a randomized trial and an observational study are sometimes simultaneously available for evaluating the effect of an intervention. The randomized data typically allows for reliable estimation of average treatment effects but…

Confounding is a significant obstacle to unbiased estimation of causal effects from observational data. For settings with high-dimensional covariates -- such as text data, genomics, or the behavioral social sciences -- researchers have…

Amidst rising appreciation for privacy and data usage rights, researchers have increasingly acknowledged the principle of data minimization, which holds that the accessibility, collection, and retention of subjects' data should be kept to…

Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard when estimating the average treatment effect. However, they are usually not a random sample from the real-world population because of the inclusion/exclusion rules. Meanwhile, observational…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are widely regarded as the gold standard for causal inference in biomedical research. For instance, when estimating the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT), a doubly robust estimation procedure…

Randomized experiments can provide unbiased estimates of sample average treatment effects. However, estimates of population treatment effects can be biased when the experimental sample and the target population differ. In this case, the…

Data from observational studies (OSs) is widely available and readily obtainable yet frequently contains confounding biases. On the other hand, data derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) helps to reduce these biases; however, it…

Existing statistical methods for the analysis of micro-randomized trials (MRTs) are designed to estimate causal excursion effects using data from a single MRT. In practice, however, researchers can often find previous MRTs that employ…

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the current gold standards to empirically measure the effect of a new drug. However, they may be of limited size and resorting to complementary non-randomized data, referred to as observational, is…

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparing the effectiveness of a new treatment to the current one (the control). Most RCTs allocate the patients to the treatment group and the control group by uniform…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating causal effects but are often costly and difficult to scale; consequently, they are frequently augmented with auxiliary external controls in many applications. Prior…

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) represent a gold standard when developing policy guidelines. However, RCTs are often narrow, and lack data on broader populations of interest. Causal effects in these populations are often estimated using…

Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects is central to data-driven decision-making, yet industrial applications often face a fundamental tension between limited randomized controlled trial (RCT) budgets and abundant but biased…

We consider estimating the conditional average treatment effect for everyone by eliminating confounding and selection bias. Unfortunately, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) eliminate confounding but impose strict exclusion criteria that…

As clinical decision-making increasingly moves toward individualized and context-specific treatment recommendations, reliance on any single evidence source, randomized or observational, may be insufficient. Principled integration of…

We argue that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are special even among settings where average treatment effects are identified by a nonparametric unconfoundedness assumption. This claim follows from two results of Robins and Ritov (1997):…

While randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for estimating causal treatment effects, their limited sample sizes and restrictive criteria make it difficult to extrapolate to a broader population. Observational data, while…

We aim to generalize the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to a target population with the help of some observational data. This is a problem of causal effect identification with multiple data sources. Challenges arise when the…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can be used to generate guarantees on treatment effects. However, RCTs often spend unnecessary resources exploring sub-optimal treatments, which can reduce the power of treatment guarantees. To address…