Practical Guide to Honest Causal Forests for Identifying Heterogeneous Treatment Effects
Abstract
"Heterogeneous treatment effects" is a term which refers to conditional average treatment effects (i.e., CATEs) that vary across population subgroups. Epidemiologists are often interested in estimating such effects because they can help detect populations that may particularly benefit from or be harmed by a treatment. However, standard regression approaches for estimating heterogeneous effects are limited by preexisting hypotheses, test a single effect modifier at a time, and are subject to the multiple-comparisons problem. In this article, we aim to offer a practical guide to honest causal forests, an ensemble tree-based learning method which can discover as well as estimate heterogeneous treatment effects using a data-driven approach. We discuss the fundamentals of tree-based methods, describe how honest causal forests can identify and estimate heterogeneous effects, and demonstrate an implementation of this method using simulated data. Our implementation highlights the steps required to simulate data sets, build honest causal forests, and assess model performance across a variety of simulation scenarios. Overall, this paper is intended for epidemiologists and other population health researchers who lack an extensive background in machine learning yet are interested in utilizing an emerging method for identifying and estimating heterogeneous treatment effects.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
ML and AI techniques, such as survival analysis (e.g. Survival Forest) and Bayesian networks, can model the time-varying effects of exposures on health outcomes and identify optimal timing and targeting of interventions.
“ML and AI techniques, such as survival analysis (e.g. Survival Forest) and Bayesian networks, can model the time-varying effects of exposures on health outcomes and identify optimal timing and targeting of interventions [37, 38].”
From Integrating machine learning and artificial intelligence in life-course epidemiology: pathways to innovative public health solutions (2024) · cites this paper as [37]
Advanced ML techniques, such as causal forests, can directly estimate heterogeneous treatment effects and minimize bias in observational studies.
“Additionally, advanced ML techniques, such as causal forests, can directly estimate heterogeneous treatment effects and minimize bias in observational studies [37–39].”
From Integrating machine learning and artificial intelligence in life-course epidemiology: pathways to innovative public health solutions (2024) · cites this paper as [37]
Causal inference methods enhanced by ML, such as causal forests, can simultaneously address multiple principles by estimating heterogeneous treatment effects across different life stages, social contexts, and individual characteristics.
“For instance, causal inference methods enhanced by ML, such as causal forests, can simultaneously address multiple principles by estimating heterogeneous treatment effects across different life stages, social contexts, and individual characteristics [37–39].”
From Integrating machine learning and artificial intelligence in life-course epidemiology: pathways to innovative public health solutions (2024) · cites this paper as [37]
Cites
Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
Polack, F. P., Thomas, S. J., Kitchin, N., Absalon, J., Gurtman, A., Lockhart, S., Perez, J. L., Pérez Marc, G., Moreira, E. D., Zerbini, C., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2034577 · Cited by 14,592 · see citing works
Strobl, C., Malley, J., & Tutz, G. (2009) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0016973 · Cited by 2,583 · see citing works
Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects
Athey, S., & Imbens, G. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1510489113 · Cited by 1,586 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chen, S., Yu, J., Chamouni, S., Wang, Y., & Li, Y. (2024) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03566-x · Cited by 73 · see citing works
“Additionally, advanced ML techniques, such as causal forests, can directly estimate heterogeneous treat-ment effects and minimize bias in observational studies [37–39].”
BackgroundArtificial intelligence for dementia prevention
Newby, D., Orgeta, V., Marshall, C. R., Lourida, I., Albertyn, C. P., Tamburin, S., Raymont, V., Veldsman, M., Koychev, I., Bauermeister, S., et al. (2023) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1002/alz.13463 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jawadekar, N., Kezios, K., Odden, M. C., Stingone, J. A., Calonico, S., Rudolph, K., & Zeki Al Hazzouri, A.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Jawadekar, Neal
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2023-02-24
- Volume
- 192
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1155-1165
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W4322496502
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 13.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- treatment effect heterogeneity, conditional average treatment effect, tree-based models, ensemble learning, effect modifiers, multiple comparisons, causal inference
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Computer Simulation, Humans, Causality, Forests
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review