Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T00:26:35.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating the causal effects of treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2011

Graham Dunn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Objective – To provide a relatively non-technical review of recent statistical research on the analysis and interpretation of the results of randomised controlled trials in which there are possibly all three of the following types of protocol violation: non-adherence to allocated treatment, contamination (that is, patients receiving treatments other than the one to which they were allocated) and attrition (missing outcome data). Methods – The estimation methods involve the use of potential outcomes (counterfactuals) in the definition of a causal effect of treatment and in drawing valid inferences concerning its size. Results – The methods are explained through the use of simple arithmetical expressions involving the counts from three-way contingency tables (Outcome by Treatment Received by Random Allocation). Illustration is provided through the use of a hypothetical data set. Conclusions – Recent advances in statistical methodology enable one to estimate treatment effects from the results of randomised trials in which the treatment actually received is not necessarily the one to which the patient was allocated. These methods allow one to make adjustments to allow for both non-compliance and loss to follow-up. Even for such a 'broken' randomised trial, inference concerning causal effects is safer than that from data arising from an observational study that never involved random allocation in the first place.

Keywords

Average Causal EffectComplier Average Causal Effecttreatment effectscausal effectsnon-compliancedrop-outsmissing data
Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 206 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

REFERENCES

Angrist, J.D., Imbens, G.W. & Rubin, D.B. (1996). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association 91, 444–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, J., Du, J., Hill, J.L. & Rubin, D.B. (1998). A broader template for analysing broken randomised experiments. Sociological Methods & Research 27, 285–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, H.S. (1984). Accounting for no-shows in experimental evaluation designs. Evaluation Review 8, 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creed, F., Mbaya, P., Lancashire, S., Tomenson, B., Williams, B. & Holme, S. (1997). Cost effectiveness of day and inpatient psychiatric treatment: results of a randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal 314, 1381–1385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, G. (1997). Compensating for missing data in psychiatric surveys. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale 6, 159–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, G. (2001). Statistical methods for measuring outcomes. In Mental Health Outcome Measures (ed. Tansella, M. and Thomicroft, G.), pp 5–18. Gaskell: London.Google Scholar
Dunn, G. (2002). The challenge of patient choice and non-adherence to treatment in randomized controlled trials of counselling or psychotherapy. Understanding Statistics 1, 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frangakis, C.E. & Rubin, D.B. (1999). Addressing complications of intention-to-treat analysis in the combined presence of all-or-none treatment-noncompliance and subsequent missing outcomes. Biometrika 86, 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenland, S. (2000). An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists. International Journal of Epidemiology 29, 722–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirano, K., Imbens, G.W., Rubin, D.B. & Zhou, X.-H. (2000). Assessing the effect of an influenza vaccine in an encouragement design. Biostatistics 1,69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, P.W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association 81, 945–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jo, B. (in press). Model misspecification sensitivity analysis in estimating causal effects of intervention with noncompliance. Statistics in Medicine.Google Scholar
Jo, B. (2002). Statistical power in randomised intervention studies with noncompliance. Psychological Methods 7, 178–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, R.J.A. & Rubin, D.B. (1987). Statistical Analysis With Missing Data. Wiley: New York.Google Scholar
Little, R.J.A. & Rubin, D.B. (2000). Causal effects in clinical and epidemiological studies via potential outcomes: concepts and analytical approaches. Annul Review of Public Health 21, 121–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, R. & Yau, L.H.Y. (1998). Statistical techniques for analyzing data from prevention trials: treatment of no-shows using Rubin's causal model. Psychological Methods 3, 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagelekerke, N., Fidler, V., Berasen, R. & Borgdorff, M. (2000). Estimating treatment effects in randomized clinical trials in the presence of non-compliance. Statistics in Medicine 19, 1849–1864.3.0.CO;2-1>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearl, J. (2000). Causality. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Robins, J.M. & Finkelstein, D.M. (2000). Corecting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS clinical trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests. Biometrics 56, 779–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, D.B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66, 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheiner, L.B. & Rubin, D.B. (1995). Intention-to-treat and the goals of clinical trials. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 57, 6–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sommer, A. & Zeger, S.L. (1991). On estimating efficacy from clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 10, 45–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, Taylor & , Thomicroft (2001). Uses and limits of randomised controlled trials in mental health service and research. In Mental Health Outcome Measures (ed. Tansella, M. and Thomicroft, G.), pp. 166–177. Gaskell: London.Google Scholar
Yau, L.H.Y. & Little, R.J. (2001). Inference for the complier-average causal effect from longitudinal data subject to noncompliance and missing data, with application to a job training assessment for the unemployed. Journal of the American Statistical Association 96, 1232–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeger, S.L. (1998). Noncompliance, adjustment for. In Encylopedia of Biostatistics (ed. Armitage, P. and Colton, T.), pp. 3006–3009. John Wiley & Sons: Chichester.Google Scholar