Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:57:12.835Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

31 - Statistical Inference for Causal Effects in Clinical Psychology

Fundamental Concepts and Analytical Approaches

from Part VII - General Analytic Considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2020

By
Reagan Mozer ,
Donald B. Rubin  and
Jose Zubizarreta
Edited by
Aidan G. C. Wright  and
Michael N. Hallquist
Aidan G. C. Wright
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Michael N. Hallquist
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Summary

A central problem in clinical psychology is how to draw statistical inferences about the causal effects of treatments (i.e., interventions) from randomized and nonrandomized data. For example, does exposure to childhood trauma really impair cognitive functioning in adults, or does a new medication for treating a psychological condition reduce the occurrence of negative physical health outcomes relative to existing treatments? This chapter describes a general approach to the estimation of such causal effects based on the Rubin Causal Model (RCM). Under this framework, causal effects are defined in terms of potential outcomes and inferences are based on a probabilistic assignment mechanism, which mathematically describes how treatments are given to units. Frequentist and model-based forms of statistical inference for causal effects in randomized experiments and observational studies are presented, and the application of this approach to a number of data collection designs and associated problems commonly encountered in clinical research is discussed.

Keywords

causal inferencepotential outcomesrandomized experimentobservational study
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology , pp. 415 - 425
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Angrist, J., & Krueger, A. B. (2001). Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(4), 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434), 444–455.Google Scholar
Athey, S., & Imbens, G. W. (2015). Machine Learning Methods for Estimating Heterogeneous Causal Effects. Stat, 1050(5), 1‒26.Google Scholar
Bind, MAC., & Rubin, D. B. (2017). Bridging observational studies and randomized experiments by embedding the former in the latter. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 28(7), 1958–1978.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G., & Chambers, S. P. (1965). The Planning of Observational Studies of Human Populations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 128(2), 234–266.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G., & Rubin, D. B. (1973). Controlling Bias in Observational Studies: A Review. Sankhӯa: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series A, 35(4), 417–446.Google Scholar
Cornfield, J., Haenszel, W., Hammond, E. C., Lilienfeld, A. M., Shimkin, M. B., & Wynder, E. L. (1959). Smoking and Lung Cancer: Recent Evidence and a Discussion of Some Questions. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22(1), 173–203.Google Scholar
Cornfield, J., Haenszel, W., Hammond, E. C., Lilienfeld, A. M., Shimkin, M. B., & Wynder, E. L. (2009). Smoking and Lung Cancer: Recent Evidence and a Discussion of Some Questions. International Journal of Epidemiology, 38(5), 1175–1191.Google Scholar
Cox, D. R. (1958). Planning of Experiments. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data via the EM Algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 39(1), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, P., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2016). Sensitivity Analysis without Assumptions. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 27(3), 368‒377.Google Scholar
Ding, P., Geng, Z., Yan, W., & Zhou, X.-H. (2011). Identifiability and Estimation of Causal Effects by Principal Stratification with Outcomes Truncated by Death. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(496), 1578–1591.Google Scholar
Feller, A., Mealli, F., & Miratrix, L. (2017). Principal Score Methods: Assumptions, Extensions, and Practical Considerations. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 42(6), 726–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Forastiere, L., Mealli, F., Miratrix, L. (2017). Posterior Predictive p-Values with Fisher Randomization Tests in Noncompliance Settings: Test Statistics vs Discrepancy Measures. Bayesian Analysis, 13(3), 681–701.Google Scholar
Frangakis, C., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Principal Stratification in Causal Inference. Biometrics, 58(1), 21–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frumento, P., Mealli, F., Pacini, B., & Rubin, D. B. (2012). Evaluating the Effect of Training on Wages in the Presence of Noncompliance, Nonemployment, and Missing Outcome Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 107(498), 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geman, S., & Geman, D. (1984). Stochastic Relaxation, Gibbs Distributions, and the Bayesian Restoration of Images. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 6, 721–741.Google Scholar
Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing Data Analysis: Making It Work in the Real World. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576.Google Scholar
Hirano, K., & Imbens, G. W. (2001). Estimation of Causal Effects Using Propensity Score Weighting: An Application to Data on Right Heart Catheterization. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 2(3), 259–278.Google Scholar
Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., Rubin, D. B., & Zhou, X.-H. (2000). Assessing the Effect of an Influenza Vaccine in an Encouragement Design. Biostatistics, 1(1), 69–88.Google Scholar
Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and Causal Inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(396), 945–960.Google Scholar
Horowitz, J. L., & Manski, C. F. (2000). Nonparametric Analysis of Randomized Experiments with Missing Covariate and Outcome Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95(449), 77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1997a). Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects in Randomized Experiments with Noncompliance. The Annals of Statistics, 25(1), 305–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1997b). Estimating Outcome Distributions for Compliers in Instrumental Variables Models. Review of Economic Studies, 64(4), 555–574.Google Scholar
Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (2008). Rubin Causal Model. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 7, 255‒262.Google Scholar
Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (2015). Causal Inference in Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kessels, R., Mozer, R., & Bloemers, J. (2017). Methods for Assessing and Controlling Placebo Effects. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 28(4), 1141–1156.Google Scholar
Landsberger, H. A. (1958). Hawthorne Revisited: Management and the Worker, Its Critics, and Developments in Human Relations in Industry. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, D. S., & Lemieuxa, T. (2010). Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(2), 281–355.Google Scholar
Li, F., Mattei, A., & Mealli, F. (2015). Evaluating the Causal Effect of University Grants on Student Dropout: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design Using Principal Stratification. Annals of Applied Statistics, 9(4), 1906–1931.Google Scholar
Little, R. J., & Rubin, D. B. (2020). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, 3rd edition. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Loken, E. (2004). Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Temperament Types. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(4), 625–652.Google Scholar
Lu, Z.-H., Chow, S.-M., & Loken, E. (2017). A Comparison of Bayesian and Frequentist Model Selection Methods for Factor Analysis Models. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 361‒381.Google Scholar
Manski, C. F., & Nagin, D. S. (1998). 3. Bounding Disagreements about Treatment Effects: A Case Study of Sentencing and Recidivism. Sociological Methodology, 28(1), 99–137.Google Scholar
Mattei, A., & Mealli, F. (2016). Regression Discontinuity Designs as Local Randomized Experiments. Observational Studies, 2, 156‒173.Google Scholar
McConnell, S., Stuart, E. A., & Devaney, B. (2008). The Truncation-by-Death Problem: What to Do in an Experimental Evaluation When the Outcome Is Not Always Defined. Evaluation Review, 32(2), 157–186.Google Scholar
Mealli, F., & Mattei, A. (2012). A Refreshing Account of Principal Stratification. International Journal of Biostatistics, 8(1), 1‒19.Google Scholar
Mealli, F., & Pacini, B. (2013). Using Secondary Outcomes to Sharpen Inference in Randomized Experiments with Noncompliance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 108(503), 1120–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mealli, F., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Assumptions When Analyzing Randomized Experiments with Noncompliance and Missing Outcomes. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 3(3), 225–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mozer, R., Kessels, R., & Rubin, D. B. (2018). Disentangling Treatment and Placebo Effects in Randomized Experiments Using Principal Stratification ‒ An Introduction. In Wiberg, M, Culpepper, S., Janssen, R, González, J., & Molenaar, D (Eds.), Quantitative Psychology (pp. 11–23). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neyman, J. (1923). On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments: Essay on Principles, Section 9 (Translated) in Statistical Science (1990), 5(4), 465‒480). Annals of Agricultural Sciences, 10, 1–51.Google Scholar
Neyman, J., & Iwaszkiewicz, K. (1935). Statistical Problems in Agricultural Experimentation. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2(2), 107–180.Google Scholar
Pearl, J. (2009). Causal Inference in Statistics: An Overview. Statistics Surveys, 3, 96‒146.Google Scholar
Raghunathan, T. E., Lepkowski, J. M., Van Hoewyk, J., & Solenberger, P. (2001). A Multivariate Technique for Multiply Imputing Missing Values Using a Sequence of Regression Models. Survey Methodology, 27(1), 85–96.Google Scholar
Robins, J. M. (2001). Data, Design, and Background Knowledge in Etiologic Inference. Epidemiology, 12(3), 313–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robins, J. M., Rotnitzky, A., & Zhao, L. P. (1995). Analysis of Semiparametric Regression Models for Repeated Outcomes in the Presence of Missing Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90(429), 106–121.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies. In Observational Studies (pp. 1–17). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R. (2010). Design of Observational Studies. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R. (2012). Optimal Matching of an Optimally Chosen Subset in Observational Studies. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 21(1), 57–71.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983a). Assessing Sensitivity to an Unobserved Binary Covariate in an Observational Study with Binary Outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 45(2), 212–218.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983b). The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, R., & Fode, K. L. (1963). The Effect of Experimenter Bias on the Performance of the Albino Rat. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 8(3), 183–189.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1966). Teachers’ Expectancies: Determinants of Pupils’ IQ Gains. Psychological Reports, 19(1), 115–118.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1973). The Use of Matched Sampling and Regression Adjustment to Remove Bias in Observational Studies. Biometrics, 29(1), 185–203.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating Causal Effects of Treatments in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(5), 688‒701.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1976). Inference and Missing Data. Biometrika, 63(3), 581–592.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1977). Assignment to Treatment Group on the Basis of a Covariate. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1978). Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects: The Role of Randomization. Annals of Statistics, 6(1), 34–58.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1980). Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test Comment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75(371), 591–593.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1987, 2004). Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1990a). Comment: Neyman (1923) and Causal Inference in Experiments and Observational Studies. Statistical Science, 5(4), 472–480.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (1990b). Formal Mode of Statistical Inference for Causal Effects. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 25(3), 279–292.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2006a). Causal Inference through Potential Outcomes and Principal Stratification: Application to Studies with “Censoring” Due to Death. Statistical Science, 21(3), 299–309.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2006b). Matched Sampling for Casual Inference. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2007a). The Design versus the Analysis of Observational Studies for Causal Effects: Parallels with the Design of Randomized Trials. Statistics in Medicine, 26(1), 20–36.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2007b). Statistical Inference for Causal Effects, with Emphasis on Applications in Epidemiology and Medical Statistics. Handbook of Statistics, 27, 28–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2008). For Objective Causal Inference, Design Trumps Analysis. Annals of Applied Statistics, 2(3), 808–840.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B. (2019).Google Scholar
Rubin, D. B., & Schenker, N. (1987). Interval Estimation from Multiply-Imputed Data: A Case Study Using Census Agriculture Industry Codes. Journal of Official Statistics, 3(4), 375‒387.Google Scholar
Schafer, J. L. (1999). Multiple Imputation: A Primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
Sheiner, L. B., & Rubin, D. B. (1995). Intention-to-Treat Analysis and the Goals of Clinical Trials. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 57(1), 6–15.Google Scholar
Tanner, M. A., & Wong, W. H. (1987). The Calculation of Posterior Distributions by Data Augmentation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(398), 528–540.Google Scholar
Van Buuren, S. (2007). Multiple Imputation of Discrete and Continuous Data by Fully Conditional Specification. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 16(3), 219–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Laan, M. J., & Rose, S. (2011). Targeted Learning: Causal Inference for Observational and Experimental Data. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
VanderWeele, T. J., & Robins, J. M. (2012). Stochastic Counterfactuals and Stochastic Sufficient Causes. Statistica Sinica, 22(1), 379‒392.Google Scholar
Zhang, J. L., & Rubin, D. B. (2003). Estimation of Causal Effects via Principal Stratification When Some Outcomes Are Truncated by Death. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28(4), 353–368.Google Scholar
Zhang, J. L., & Rubin, D. (2004). Censoring Due to Death via Principal Stratification. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28(4), 353‒368.Google Scholar
Zhang, J. L., Rubin, D. B., & Mealli, F. (2008). Evaluating the Effects of Job Training Programs on Wages through Principal Stratification. Modelling and Evaluating Treatment Effects in Econometrics, 21, 117–145.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, J. R. (2012). Using Mixed Integer Programming for Matching in an Observational Study of Kidney Failure after Surgery. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 107(500), 1360–1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zubizarreta, J. R. (2015). Stable Weights That Balance Covariates for Estimation with Incomplete Outcome Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 110(511), 910–922.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, J. R., & Kilcioglu, C. (2016). Designmatch: Construction of Optimally Matched Samples for Randomized Experiments and Observational Studies that are Balanced by Design. [Computer software manual]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=designmatch (R package version 0.1.1).Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, J. R., Paredes, R. D., & Rosenbaum, P. R. (2014). Matching for Balance, Pairing for Heterogeneity in an Observational Study of the Effectiveness of For-Profit and Not-For-Profit High Schools in Chile. Annals of Applied Statistics, 8(1), 204–231.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, J. R., Small, D. S., Goyal, N. K., Lorch, S., & Rosenbaum, P. R. (2013). Stronger Instruments via Integer Programming in an Observational Study of Late Preterm Birth Outcomes. Annals of Applied Statistics, 7(1), 25–50.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×