Search

Mental disorders present challenges in diagnosis and treatment due to their complex and heterogeneous nature. Electroencephalogram (EEG) has shown promise as a source of potential biomarkers for these disorders. However, existing methods for analyzing EEG signals have limitations in addressing heterogeneity and capturing complex brain activity patterns between regions. This paper proposes a novel random effects state-space model (RESSM) for analyzing large-scale multi-channel resting-state EEG signals, accounting for the heterogeneity of brain connectivities between groups and individual subjects. We incorporate multi-level random effects for temporal dynamical and spatial mapping matrices and address non-stationarity so that the brain connectivity patterns can vary over time. The model is fitted under a Bayesian hierarchical model framework coupled with a Gibbs sampler. Compared to previous mixed-effects state-space models, we directly model high-dimensional random effects matrices of interest without structural constraints and tackle the challenge of identifiability. Through extensive simulation studies, we demonstrate that our approach yields valid estimation and inference. We apply RESSM to a multi-site clinical trial of major depressive disorder (MDD). Our analysis uncovers significant differences in resting-state brain temporal dynamics among MDD patients compared to healthy individuals. In addition, we show the subject-level EEG features derived from RESSM exhibit a superior predictive value for the heterogeneous treatment effect compared to the EEG frequency band power, suggesting the potential of EEG as a valuable biomarker for MDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In biomedical science, analyzing treatment effect heterogeneity plays an essential role in assisting personalized medicine. The main goals of analyzing treatment effect heterogeneity include estimating treatment effects in clinically relevant subgroups and predicting whether a patient subpopulation might benefit from a particular treatment. Conventional approaches often evaluate the subgroup treatment effects via parametric modeling and can thus be susceptible to model mis-specifications. In this paper, we take a model-free semiparametric perspective and aim to efficiently evaluate the heterogeneous treatment effects of multiple subgroups simultaneously under the one-step targeted maximum-likelihood estimation (TMLE) framework. When the number of subgroups is large, we further expand this path of research by looking at a variation of the one-step TMLE that is robust to the presence of small estimated propensity scores in finite samples. From our simulations, our method demonstrates substantial finite sample improvements compared to conventional methods. In a case study, our method unveils the potential treatment effect heterogeneity of rs12916-T allele (a proxy for statin usage) in decreasing Alzheimers disease risk.

Several epidemiological studies have provided evidence that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter (pm2.5) increases mortality rate. Furthermore, some population characteristics (e.g., age, race, and socioeconomic status) might play a crucial role in understanding vulnerability to air pollution. To inform policy, it is necessary to identify groups of the population that are more or less vulnerable to air pollution. In causal inference literature, the group average treatment effect (GATE) is a distinctive facet of the conditional average treatment effect. This widely employed metric serves to characterize the heterogeneity of a treatment effect based on some population characteristics. In this paper, we introduce a novel Confounder-Dependent Bayesian Mixture Model (CDBMM) to characterize causal effect heterogeneity. More specifically, our method leverages the flexibility of the dependent Dirichlet process to model the distribution of the potential outcomes conditionally to the covariates and the treatment levels, thus enabling us to: (i) identify heterogeneous and mutually exclusive population groups defined by similar GATEs in a data-driven way, and (ii) estimate and characterize the causal effects within each of the identified groups. Through simulations, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in uncovering key insights about treatment effects heterogeneity. We apply our method to claims data from Medicare enrollees in Texas. We found six mutually exclusive groups where the causal effects of pm2.5 on mortality rate are heterogeneous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We propose a doubly robust approach to characterizing treatment effect heterogeneity in observational studies. We develop a frequentist inferential procedure that utilizes posterior distributions for both the propensity score and outcome regression models to provide valid inference on the conditional average treatment effect even when high‐dimensional or nonparametric models are used. We show that our approach leads to conservative inference in finite samples or under model misspecification and provides a consistent variance estimator when both models are correctly specified. In simulations, we illustrate the utility of these results in difficult settings such as high‐dimensional covariate spaces or highly flexible models for the propensity score and outcome regression. Lastly, we analyze environmental exposure data from NHANES to identify how the effects of these exposures vary by subject‐level characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fraction who benefit from treatment is the proportion of patients whose potential outcome under treatment is better than that under control. Inference on this parameter is challenging since it is only partially identifiable, even in our context of a randomized trial. We propose a new method for constructing a confidence interval for the fraction, when the outcome is ordinal or binary. Our confidence interval procedure is pointwise consistent. It does not require any assumptions about the joint distribution of the potential outcomes, although it has the flexibility to incorporate various user‐defined assumptions. Our method is based on a stochastic optimization technique involving a second‐order, asymptotic approximation that, to the best of our knowledge, has not been applied to biomedical studies. This approximation leads to statistics that are solutions to quadratic programs, which can be computed efficiently using optimization tools. In simulation, our method attains the nominal coverage probability or higher, and can have narrower average width than competitor methods. We apply it to a trial of a new intervention for stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Confounder selection and adjustment are essential elements of assessing the causal effect of an exposure or treatment in observational studies. Building upon work by Wang et al. (2012, Biometrics 68, 661-671) and Lefebvre et al. (2014, Statistics in Medicine 33, 2797-2813), we propose and evaluate a Bayesian method to estimate average causal effects in studies with a large number of potential confounders, relatively few observations, likely interactions between confounders and the exposure of interest, and uncertainty on which confounders and interaction terms should be included. Our method is applicable across all exposures and outcomes that can be handled through generalized linear models. In this general setting, estimation of the average causal effect is different from estimation of the exposure coefficient in the outcome model due to noncollapsibility. We implement a Bayesian bootstrap procedure to integrate over the distribution of potential confounders and to estimate the causal effect. Our method permits estimation of both the overall population causal effect and effects in specified subpopulations, providing clear characterization of heterogeneous exposure effects that may vary considerably across different covariate profiles. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed method performs well in small sample size situations with 100-150 observations and 50 covariates. The method is applied to data on 15,060 US Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor between 2000 and 2009 to evaluate whether surgery reduces hospital readmissions within 30 days of diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]