Causal Inference with Double/Debiased Machine Learning for Evaluating the Health Effects of Multiple Mismeasured Pollutants

Gang Xu; Xin Zhou; Molin Wang; Boya Zhang; Wenhao Jiang; Francine Laden; Helen H. Suh; Adam A. Szpiro; Donna Spiegelman; Zuoheng Wang

arXiv · 2410.07135

Causal Inference with Double/Debiased Machine Learning for Evaluating the Health Effects of Multiple Mismeasured Pollutants

Gang Xu·Xin Zhou·Molin Wang·Boya Zhang·Wenhao Jiang·Francine Laden·Helen H. Suh·Adam A. Szpiro·Donna Spiegelman·Zuoheng Wang

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

One way to quantify exposure to air pollution and its constituents in epidemiologic studies is to use an individual's nearest monitor. This strategy results in potential inaccuracy in the actual personal exposure, introducing bias in estimating the health effects of air pollution and its constituents, especially when evaluating the causal effects of correlated multi-pollutant constituents measured with correlated error. This paper addresses estimation and inference for the causal effect of one constituent in the presence of other PM2.5 constituents, accounting for measurement error and correlations. We used a linear regression calibration model, fitted with generalized estimating equations in an external validation study, and extended a double/debiased machine learning (DML) approach to correct for measurement error and estimate the effect of interest in the main study. We demonstrated that the DML estimator with regression calibration is consistent and derived its asymptotic variance. Simulations showed that the proposed estimator reduced bias and attained nominal coverage probability across most simulation settings. We applied this method to assess the causal effects of PM2.5 constituents on cognitive function in the Nurses' Health Study and identified two PM2.5 constituents, Br and Mn, that showed a negative causal effect on cognitive function after measurement error correction.

Explore related subjects

stat.AP cs.LG stat.ML

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Gang Xu, Xin Zhou, Molin Wang, Boya Zhang, Wenhao Jiang, Francine Laden, Helen H. Suh, Adam A. Szpiro, Donna Spiegelman, Zuoheng Wang. 2024-09-22. Causal Inference with Double/Debiased Machine Learning for Evaluating the Health Effects of Multiple Mismeasured Pollutants. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.07135

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Relegation, promotion and the components of scoring in water polo

Relegation, not the championship, decides the outcome of many European water polo leagues: one club has won every recent national title in Italy, Spain and Hungary. We make the relegation decision our object of inference. Serie A1 relegates one club for finishing last and a second through a three-match play-out, and we ask at each stage how much can be known and when. Promoted clubs arrive with no top-flight record, so we also compare four ways of setting their prior. These analyses rest on the first Bayesian hierarchical model of water polo, which splits scoring into even-strength, man-up and penalty components, models opportunities and conversions separately, and lets abilities evolve between seasons. Treating the components as independent proves untenable, since they compete for a common budget of possessions. Fitted to a new dataset of 940 matches, the model identifies the directly relegated club from the ninth round, before the league table does, predicts the play-out field better than the table, and shows the play-out itself to be close to a coin toss. Promoted clubs start below the league on every component except drawing exclusions: knowing a club was promoted improves forecasts; knowing how does not.

stat.AP↗

arXiv2026

Geospatial Foundation Models Capture Health-Relevant Dimensions of Place Beyond Conventional Social Risk Indices

Area-based social risk indices summarize residents' socioeconomic conditions but incompletely capture physical features of place that may affect health. We evaluated whether numerical representations of physical place produced by four geospatial foundation model families from 2022 satellite data explained residual variance in tract-level associations between the Area Deprivation Index, Social Deprivation Index, and Social Vulnerability Index with health outcomes. We used LightGBM to predict variables from the American Community Survey and 40 chronic disease and health-behavior outcomes from CDC PLACES across 82,646 census tracts in the contiguous United States, evaluating performance across 10 held-out states. Among survey variables, models were moderately predictive of some variables including housing type (R-squared up to 0.54) but weak for disability, unemployment, and income disparity. For health outcomes, models explained up to 54% of variance left unexplained by social risk indices, with the largest gains for annual checkups, arthritis, and high blood pressure. Mean total variance explained by geospatial foundation models across the 40 health-related outcomes increased from 0.31 in the smallest tract-size decile to 0.39 in the largest. Geospatial foundation models capture health-relevant features of place not represented by conventional social risk indices and may usefully augment them in epidemiological analyses.

stat.AP↗

arXiv2026

Transporting summary measures of relative effects from randomised trials to the treated patient population: an application to breast cancer endocrine therapy

Randomised trials often report relative treatment effects, such as risk ratios and hazard ratios, for trial populations. Clinical decision-making, however, often benefits from estimates of absolute treatment effects in the population eligible for treatment. Trial participants may not represent this target population well, and restrictions on access to individual participant trial data can further complicate absolute effect estimation. Routine care data are often representative of the target population but may be subject to uncontrolled confounding. We consider estimation of the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT), an absolute measure, by combining a representative sample of treated routine care patients with summary measures (i.e., estimated risk or hazard ratios) from either a randomised trial or a meta-analysis of trials. Under marginal or conditional transportability assumptions, the ATT is shown to be identifiable. The implications of collapsibility of the effect measure on transportability are discussed, and plug-in estimators of the ATT are presented. Simulation studies are used to assess finite sample performance of the estimators in a range of settings. The proposed methods are applied to estimate the ATT of endocrine therapy on 15-year breast cancer mortality using results from a meta-analysis of randomised trials and England's National Disease Registration Service.

stat.AP↗