On Defense of the Hazard Ratio

07/22/2023
by   Andrew Ying, et al.
0

There has been debate on whether the hazard function should be used for causal inference in time-to-event studies. The main criticism is that there is selection bias because the risk sets beyond the first event time are comprised of subsets of survivors who are no longer balanced in the risk factors, even in the absence of unmeasured confounding, measurement error, and model misspecification. In this short communication we use the potential outcomes framework and the single-world intervention graph to show that there is indeed no selection bias when estimating the average treatment effect, and that the hazard ratio over time can provide a useful interpretation in practical settings.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
08/02/2022

Doubly Robust Proximal Causal Inference under Confounded Outcome-Dependent Sampling

Unmeasured confounding and selection bias are often of concern in observ...
research
07/30/2019

Incremental causal effects

This is a draft. The ignorability assumption is a key assumption in caus...
research
01/26/2021

CDSM – Casual Inference using Deep Bayesian Dynamic Survival Models

A smart healthcare system that supports clinicians for risk-calibrated t...
research
08/09/2020

A potential outcomes approach to selection bias

Selection bias occurs when the association between exposure and disease ...
research
10/29/2022

The built-in selection bias of hazard ratios formalized

It is known that the hazard ratio lacks a useful causal interpretation. ...
research
09/10/2020

A note on post-treatment selection in studying racial discrimination in policing

We discuss some causal estimands used to study racial discrimination in ...
research
07/11/2019

The acute:chronic workload ratio: challenges and prospects for improvement

Injuries occur when an athlete performs a greater amount of activity (wo...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset