Related papers: Quantifying Treatment Effects: Estimating Risk Rat…

Identifying patient subgroups with different treatment responses is an important task to inform medical recommendations, guidelines, and the design of future clinical trials. Existing approaches for treatment effect estimation primarily…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) frequently utilize covariate-adaptive randomization (CAR) (e.g., stratified block randomization) and commonly suffer from imperfect compliance. This paper studies the identification and inference for the…

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…

In the presence of heterogeneity between the randomized controlled trial (RCT) participants and the target population, evaluating the treatment effect solely based on the RCT often leads to biased quantification of the real-world treatment…

Multi-regional clinical trials (MRCTs) play an increasingly crucial role in global pharmaceutical development by expediting data gathering and regulatory approval across diverse patient populations. However, differences in recruitment…

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) face inherent limitations, such as ethical or resource constraints, which lead to a limited number of study participants. To address these limitations, recent research endeavors have sought to incorporate…

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):…

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…

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…

Complementary features of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs) can be used jointly to estimate the average treatment effect of a target population. We propose a calibration weighting estimator that enforces…

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…

Randomized control trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for estimating causal effects, but often use samples that are non-representative of the actual population of interest. We propose a reweighting method for estimating population average…

In biomedical studies, estimating drug effects on chronic diseases requires a long follow-up period, which is difficult to meet in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The use of a short-term surrogate to replace the long-term outcome for…

With increasing data availability, causal effects can be evaluated across different data sets, both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. RCTs isolate the effect of the treatment from that of unwanted (confounding)…

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are often considered the gold standard for estimating causal effect, but they may lack external validity when the population eligible to the RCT is substantially different from the target population.…

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 clinical trials (RCTs) are ideal for estimating causal effects, because the distributions of background covariates are similar in expectation across treatment groups. When estimating causal effects using observational data,…

Cluster-randomized trials (CRTs) are widely used to evaluate group-level interventions and increasingly collect multiple outcomes capturing complementary dimensions of benefit and risk. Investigators often seek a single global summary of…

Randomized controlled trials (RCT's) allow researchers to estimate causal effects in an experimental sample with minimal identifying assumptions. However, to generalize or transport a causal effect from an RCT to a target population,…

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…