Cited by 202Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Dynamic Regime Marginal Structural Mean Models for Estimation of Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes, Part I: Main Content

Open access
Orellana, Liliana, Rotnitzky, Andrea, Robins, James M.·2010·The International Journal of Biostatistics

Abstract

Dynamic treatment regimes are set rules for sequential decision making based on patient covariate history. Observational studies are well suited for the investigation of the effects of dynamic treatment regimes because of the variability in treatment decisions found in them. This variability exists because different physicians make different decisions in the face of similar patient histories. In this article we describe an approach to estimate the optimal dynamic treatment regime among a set of enforceable regimes. This set is comprised by regimes defined by simple rules based on a subset of past information. The regimes in the set are indexed by a Euclidean vector. The optimal regime is the one that maximizes the expected counterfactual utility over all regimes in the set. We discuss assumptions under which it is possible to identify the optimal regime from observational longitudinal data. Murphy et al. (2001) developed efficient augmented inverse probability weighted estimators of the expected utility of one fixed regime. Our methods are based on an extension of the marginal structural mean model of Robins (1998, 1999) which incorporate the estimation ideas of Murphy et al. (2001). Our models, which we call dynamic regime marginal structural mean models, are specially suitable for estimating the optimal treatment regime in a moderately small class of enforceable regimes of interest. We consider both parametric and semiparametric dynamic regime marginal structural models. We discuss locally efficient, double-robust estimation of the model parameters and of the index of the optimal treatment regime in the set. In a companion paper in this issue of the journal we provide proofs of the main results.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2202/1557-4679.1200

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Gill, R.D, van der Laan, M.J. and Robins J.M. (1997). Coarsening at ran- dom: characterizations, conjectures and counterexamples. Proceedings of the First Seattle Symposium on Survival Analysis, pp. 255-294.
  2. The International Journal of Biostatistics, Vol. 6 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 8 DOI: 10.2202/1557-4679.1200 Brought to you by | Deakin University Authenticated Download Date | 2/17/15 11:40 AM
  3. Luenberger, D.G. (1969). Optimization by vector spaces. Wiley, New York.
  4. Orellana, L. and Rotnitzky, A. (2007). Estimation of the e¤ect of dynamic treatment regimes under ‡e x i b l e dynamic visit regimes. Liliana Orellana's Harvard. University, Dep of Biostatistics, Ph.D. Thesis, Chapter 2.
  5. Robins, J. M. (1989). The analysis of randomized and nonrandomized AIDS treatment trials using a new approach to causal inference in longitudinal studies. In Health Service Research Methodology: a Focus on AIDS (eds L. Sechrest, H. Freeman and A. Mulley), pp. 113-159. US Public Health Service.
  6. Eds.: D. G. Ostrow & R. Kessler. Plenum Publishing, New York, pp. 213- 290.
  7. Robins, J.M. (1997). Causal inference from complex longitudinal data. Latent Variable Modeling and Applications to Causality. Lecture Notes in Statis- tics (120), 69-117, (eds: M. Berkane). Springer-Verlag, Inc, New York.
  8. Robins, J.M., Rotnitzky A and van der Laan M. (2000). Comment on "On Pro…le Likelihood" by S.A. Murphy and A.W.van der Vaart. Journal of the American Statistical Association -Theory and Methods, 95(450):431- 435.
  9. Rubin, D.B. (1978). Bayesian inference for causal e¤ects: The role of random- ization. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 34-58.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Orellana, L., Rotnitzky, A., & Robins, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de Buenos Aires (AR)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
The International Journal of Biostatistics
Published
2010-03-03
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
Article 8-Article 8
ISSN
1557-4679 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026904901
Cited by
202
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 14
FWCI
8.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The International Journal of Biostatistics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM048704, R01-GM48704)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
dynamic treatment regimes, optimal treatment regimes, augmented inverse probability weighting, double robustness, local efficiency, sequential decision making, semiparametric estimation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Clinical Trials as Topic, Decision Making, Longitudinal Studies, Probability, Research Design, Models, Statistical

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