Related papers: SECRETS: Subject-Efficient Clinical Randomized Con…
A/B tests, also known as randomized controlled experiments (RCTs), are the gold standard for evaluating the impact of new policies, products, or decisions. However, these tests can be costly in terms of time and resources, potentially…
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 the conditional average treatment effects (CATE) is very important in causal inference and has a wide range of applications across many fields. In the estimation process of CATE, the unconfoundedness assumption is typically…
Platform trials are multi-arm designs that simultaneously evaluate multiple treatments for a single disease within the same overall trial structure. Unlike traditional randomized controlled trials, they allow treatment arms to enter and…
Background: Randomized controlled trials are often used to inform policy and practice for broad populations. The average treatment effect (ATE) for a target population, however, may be different from the ATE observed in a trial if there are…
While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for estimating treatment effects in medical research, there is increasing use of and interest in using real-world data for drug development. One such use case is the…
We consider the problem of estimating the average treatment effect (ATE) in a semi-supervised learning setting, where a very small proportion of the entire set of observations are labeled with the true outcome but features predictive of the…
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often underpowered to detect treatment heterogeneity in subgroups defined by cross-classifications of multiple covariates, due to sparse sample sizes in some strata. External RCT data can help, but…
An individualized treatment rule (ITR) tailors treatments to a patient's specific characteristics. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often underpowered to detect the treatment effect heterogeneity needed for reliable ITR…
Individualized randomized experiments are central to online platforms for optimizing personalized decisions in complex environments. In two-sided markets, however, standard treatment effect estimation is often invalid due to strong temporal…
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…
In the presence of treatment effect heterogeneity, the average treatment effect (ATE) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) may differ from the average effect of the same treatment if applied to a target population of interest. If all…
Randomized control trials (RCTs) have been the gold standard to evaluate the effectiveness of a program, policy, or treatment on an outcome of interest. However, many RCTs assume that study participants are willing to share their…
In this study, we focus on estimating the heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) for survival outcome. The outcome is subject to censoring and the number of covariates is high-dimensional. We utilize data from both the randomized controlled…
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the accepted standard for treatment effect estimation but they can be infeasible due to ethical reasons and prohibitive costs. Single-arm trials, where all patients belong to the treatment group, can…
The conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is the best measure of individual causal effects given baseline covariates. However, the CATE only captures the (conditional) average, and can overlook risks and tail events, which are…
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…
The Average Treatment Effect (ATE) is a foundational metric in causal inference, widely used to assess intervention efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, in many applications -- particularly in healthcare -- this static…
Conditional average treatment effect (CATE) estimation is the de facto gold standard for targeting a treatment to a heterogeneous population. The method estimates treatment effects up to an error $\epsilon > 0$ in each of $M$ different…
The average treatment effect (ATE), the mean difference in potential outcomes under treatment and control, is a canonical causal effect. Overlap, which says that all subjects have non-zero probability of either treatment status, is…