-
Causal health impacts of power plant emission controls under modeled and uncertain physical process interference
Authors:
Nathan B. Wikle,
Corwin M. Zigler
Abstract:
Causal inference with spatial environmental data is often challenging due to the presence of interference: outcomes for observational units depend on some combination of local and non-local treatment. This is especially relevant when estimating the effect of power plant emissions controls on population health, as pollution exposure is dictated by (i) the location of point-source emissions, as well…
▽ More
Causal inference with spatial environmental data is often challenging due to the presence of interference: outcomes for observational units depend on some combination of local and non-local treatment. This is especially relevant when estimating the effect of power plant emissions controls on population health, as pollution exposure is dictated by (i) the location of point-source emissions, as well as (ii) the transport of pollutants across space via dynamic physical-chemical processes. In this work, we estimate the effectiveness of air quality interventions at coal-fired power plants in reducing two adverse health outcomes in Texas in 2016: pediatric asthma ED visits and Medicare all-cause mortality. We develop methods for causal inference with interference when the underlying network structure is not known with certainty and instead must be estimated from ancillary data. Notably, uncertainty in the interference structure is propagated to the resulting causal effect estimates. We offer a Bayesian, spatial mechanistic model for the interference map** which we combine with a flexible non-parametric outcome model to marginalize estimates of causal effects over uncertainty in the structure of interference. Our analysis finds some evidence that emissions controls at upwind power plants reduce asthma ED visits and all-cause mortality, however accounting for uncertainty in the interference renders the results largely inconclusive.
△ Less
Submitted 13 May, 2024; v1 submitted 9 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
Bayesian Nonparametric Adjustment of Confounding
Authors:
Chanmin Kim,
Mauricio Tec,
Corwin M Zigler
Abstract:
Analysis of observational studies increasingly confronts the challenge of determining which of a possibly high-dimensional set of available covariates are required to satisfy the assumption of ignorable treatment assignment for estimation of causal effects. We propose a Bayesian nonparametric approach that simultaneously 1) prioritizes inclusion of adjustment variables in accordance with existing…
▽ More
Analysis of observational studies increasingly confronts the challenge of determining which of a possibly high-dimensional set of available covariates are required to satisfy the assumption of ignorable treatment assignment for estimation of causal effects. We propose a Bayesian nonparametric approach that simultaneously 1) prioritizes inclusion of adjustment variables in accordance with existing principles of confounder selection; 2) estimates causal effects in a manner that permits complex relationships among confounders, exposures, and outcomes; and 3) provides causal estimates that account for uncertainty in the nature of confounding. The proposal relies on specification of multiple Bayesian Additive Regression Trees models, linked together with a common prior distribution that accrues posterior selection probability to covariates on the basis of association with both the exposure and the outcome of interest. A set of extensive simulation studies demonstrates that the proposed method performs well relative to similarly-motivated methodologies in a variety of scenarios. We deploy the method to investigate the causal effect of emissions from coal-fired power plants on ambient air pollution concentrations, where the prospect of confounding due to local and regional meteorological factors introduces uncertainty around the confounding role of a high-dimensional set of measured variables. Ultimately, we show that the proposed method produces more efficient and more consistent results across adjacent years than alternative methods, lending strength to the evidence of the causal relationship between SO2 emissions and ambient particulate pollution.
△ Less
Submitted 22 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
-
A Mechanistic Model of Annual Sulfate Concentrations in the United States
Authors:
Nathan B. Wikle,
Ephraim M. Hanks,
Lucas R. F. Henneman,
Corwin M. Zigler
Abstract:
We develop a mechanistic model to analyze the impact of sulfur dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants on average sulfate concentrations in the central United States. A multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) process is used to approximate the dynamics of the underlying space-time chemical transport process, and its distributional properties are leveraged to specify novel probability models fo…
▽ More
We develop a mechanistic model to analyze the impact of sulfur dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants on average sulfate concentrations in the central United States. A multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) process is used to approximate the dynamics of the underlying space-time chemical transport process, and its distributional properties are leveraged to specify novel probability models for spatial data (i.e., spatially-referenced data with no temporal replication) that are viewed as either a snapshot or a time-averaged observation of the OU process. Air pollution transport dynamics determine the mean and covariance structure of our atmospheric sulfate model, allowing us to infer which process dynamics are driving observed air pollution concentrations. We use these inferred dynamics to assess the regulatory impact of flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) technologies on human exposure to sulfate aerosols.
△ Less
Submitted 8 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Bayesian Longitudinal Causal Inference in the Analysis of the Public Health Impact of Pollutant Emissions
Authors:
Chanmin Kim,
Corwin M Zigler,
Michael J Daniels,
Christine Choirat,
Jason A Roy
Abstract:
Pollutant emissions from coal-burning power plants have been deemed to adversely impact ambient air quality and public health conditions. Despite the noticeable reduction in emissions and the improvement of air quality since the Clean Air Act (CAA) became the law, the public-health benefits from changes in emissions have not been widely evaluated yet. In terms of the chain of accountability (HEI A…
▽ More
Pollutant emissions from coal-burning power plants have been deemed to adversely impact ambient air quality and public health conditions. Despite the noticeable reduction in emissions and the improvement of air quality since the Clean Air Act (CAA) became the law, the public-health benefits from changes in emissions have not been widely evaluated yet. In terms of the chain of accountability (HEI Accountability Working Group, 2003), the link between pollutant emissions from the power plants (SO2) and public health conditions (respiratory diseases) accounting for changes in ambient air quality (PM2.5) is unknown. We provide the first assessment of the longitudinal effect of specific pollutant emission (SO2) on public health outcomes that is mediated through changes in the ambient air quality. It is of particular interest to examine the extent to which the effect that is mediated through changes in local ambient air quality differs from year to year. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian approach to estimate novel causal estimands: time-varying mediation effects in the presence of mediators and responses measured every year. We replace the commonly invoked sequential ignorability assumption with a new set of assumptions which are sufficient to identify the distributions of the natural indirect and direct effects in this setting.
△ Less
Submitted 3 January, 2019;
originally announced January 2019.
-
Evaluating Federal Policies Using Bayesian Time Series Models: Estimating the Causal Impact of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program
Authors:
Georgia Papadogeorgou,
Fiammetta Menchetti,
Christine Choirat,
Jason H. Wasfy,
Corwin M. Zigler,
Fabrizia Mealli
Abstract:
Researchers are often faced with evaluating the effect of a policy or program that was simultaneously initiated across an entire population of units at a single point in time, and its effects over the targeted population can manifest at any time period afterwards. In the presence of data measured over time, Bayesian time series models have been used to impute what would have happened after the pol…
▽ More
Researchers are often faced with evaluating the effect of a policy or program that was simultaneously initiated across an entire population of units at a single point in time, and its effects over the targeted population can manifest at any time period afterwards. In the presence of data measured over time, Bayesian time series models have been used to impute what would have happened after the policy was initiated, had the policy not taken place, in order to estimate causal effects. However, the considerations regarding the definition of the target estimands, the underlying assumptions, the plausibility of such assumptions, and the choice of an appropriate model have not been thoroughly investigated. In this paper, we establish useful estimands for the evaluation of large-scale policies. We discuss that imputation of missing potential outcomes relies on an assumption which, even though untestable, can be partially evaluated using observed data. We illustrate an approach to evaluate this key causal assumption and facilitate model elicitation based on data from the time interval before policy initiation and using classic statistical techniques. As an illustration, we study the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), a US federal intervention aiming to improve health outcomes for patients with pneumonia, acute myocardial infraction, or congestive failure admitted to a hospital. We evaluate the effect of the HRRP on population mortality among the elderly across the US and in four geographic subregions, and at different time windows. We find that the HRRP increased mortality from pneumonia and acute myocardial infraction across at least one geographical region and time horizon, and is likely to have had a detrimental effect on public health.
△ Less
Submitted 28 October, 2022; v1 submitted 13 September, 2018;
originally announced September 2018.
-
Bipartite Causal Inference with Interference
Authors:
Corwin M. Zigler,
Georgia Papadogeorgou
Abstract:
Statistical methods to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions are increasingly challenged by the inherent interconnectedness of units. Specifically, a recent flurry of methods research has addressed the problem of interference between observations, which arises when one observational unit's outcome depends not only on its treatment but also the treatment assigned to other units. We introduce…
▽ More
Statistical methods to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions are increasingly challenged by the inherent interconnectedness of units. Specifically, a recent flurry of methods research has addressed the problem of interference between observations, which arises when one observational unit's outcome depends not only on its treatment but also the treatment assigned to other units. We introduce the setting of bipartite causal inference with interference, which arises when 1) treatments are defined on observational units that are distinct from those at which outcomes are measured and 2) there is interference between units in the sense that outcomes for some units depend on the treatments assigned to many other units. Basic definitions and formulations are provided for this setting, highlighting similarities and differences with more commonly considered settings of causal inference with interference. Several types of causal estimands are discussed, and a simple inverse probability of treatment weighted estimator is developed for a subset of simplified estimands. The estimators are deployed to evaluate how interventions to reduce air pollution from 473 power plants in the U.S. causally affect cardiovascular hospitalization among Medicare beneficiaries residing at 23,458 zip code locations.
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2018;
originally announced July 2018.
-
Causal inference for interfering units with cluster and population level treatment allocation programs
Authors:
Georgia Papadogeorgou,
Fabrizia Mealli,
Corwin M. Zigler
Abstract:
Interference arises when an individual's potential outcome depends on the individual treatment level, but also on the treatment level of others. A common assumption in the causal inference literature in the presence of interference is partial interference, implying that the population can be partitioned in clusters of individuals whose potential outcomes only depend on the treatment of units withi…
▽ More
Interference arises when an individual's potential outcome depends on the individual treatment level, but also on the treatment level of others. A common assumption in the causal inference literature in the presence of interference is partial interference, implying that the population can be partitioned in clusters of individuals whose potential outcomes only depend on the treatment of units within the same cluster. Previous literature has defined average potential outcomes under counterfactual scenarios where treatments are randomly allocated to units within a cluster. However, within clusters there may be units that are more or less likely to receive treatment based on covariates or neighbors' treatment. We define new estimands that describe average potential outcomes for realistic counterfactual treatment allocation programs, extending existing estimands to take into consideration the units' covariates and dependence between units' treatment assignment. We further propose entirely new estimands for population-level interventions over the collection of clusters, which correspond in the motivating setting to regulations at the federal (vs. cluster or regional) level. We discuss these estimands, propose unbiased estimators and derive asymptotic results as the number of clusters grows. Finally, we estimate effects in a comparative effectiveness study of power plant emission reduction technologies on ambient ozone pollution.
△ Less
Submitted 14 May, 2018; v1 submitted 3 November, 2017;
originally announced November 2017.
-
Posterior Predictive Treatment Assignment for Estimating Causal Effects with Limited Overlap
Authors:
Corwin M Zigler,
Matthew Cefalu
Abstract:
Estimating causal effects with propensity scores relies upon the availability of treated and untreated units observed at each value of the estimated propensity score. In settings with strong confounding, limited so-called "overlap" in propensity score distributions can undermine the empirical basis for estimating causal effects and yield erratic finite-sample performance of existing estimators. We…
▽ More
Estimating causal effects with propensity scores relies upon the availability of treated and untreated units observed at each value of the estimated propensity score. In settings with strong confounding, limited so-called "overlap" in propensity score distributions can undermine the empirical basis for estimating causal effects and yield erratic finite-sample performance of existing estimators. We propose a Bayesian procedure designed to estimate causal effects in settings where there is limited overlap in propensity score distributions. Our method relies on the posterior predictive treatment assignment (PPTA), a quantity that is derived from the propensity score but serves different role in estimation of causal effects. We use the PPTA to estimate causal effects by marginalizing over the uncertainty in whether each observation is a member of an unknown subset for which treatment assignment can be assumed unconfounded. The resulting posterior distribution depends on the empirical basis for estimating a causal effect for each observation and has commonalities with recently-proposed "overlap weights" of Li et al. (2016). We show that the PPTA approach can be construed as a stochastic version of existing ad-hoc approaches such as pruning based on the propensity score or truncation of inverse probability of treatment weights, and highlight several practical advantages including uncertainty quantification and improved finite-sample performance. We illustrate the method in an evaluation of the effectiveness of technologies for reducing harmful pollution emissions from power plants in the United States.
△ Less
Submitted 24 October, 2017;
originally announced October 2017.
-
The central role of Bayes theorem for joint estimation of causal effects and propensity scores
Authors:
Corwin M. Zigler
Abstract:
Although propensity scores have been central to the estimation of causal effects for over 30 years, only recently has the statistical literature begun to consider in detail methods for Bayesian estimation of propensity scores and causal effects. Underlying this recent body of literature on Bayesian propensity score estimation is an implicit discordance between the goal of the propensity score and…
▽ More
Although propensity scores have been central to the estimation of causal effects for over 30 years, only recently has the statistical literature begun to consider in detail methods for Bayesian estimation of propensity scores and causal effects. Underlying this recent body of literature on Bayesian propensity score estimation is an implicit discordance between the goal of the propensity score and the use of Bayes theorem. The propensity score condenses multivariate covariate information into a scalar to allow estimation of causal effects without specifying a model for how each covariate relates to the outcome. Avoiding specification of a detailed model for the outcome response surface is valuable for robust estimation of causal effects, but this strategy is at odds with the use of Bayes theorem, which presupposes a full probability model for the observed data. The goal of this paper is to explicate this fundamental feature of Bayesian estimation of causal effects with propensity scores in order to provide context for the existing literature and for future work on this important topic.
△ Less
Submitted 8 April, 2014; v1 submitted 26 August, 2013;
originally announced August 2013.
-
The potential for bias in principal causal effect estimation when treatment received depends on a key covariate
Authors:
Corwin M. Zigler,
Thomas R. Belin
Abstract:
Motivated by a potential-outcomes perspective, the idea of principal stratification has been widely recognized for its relevance in settings susceptible to posttreatment selection bias such as randomized clinical trials where treatment received can differ from treatment assigned. In one such setting, we address subtleties involved in inference for causal effects when using a key covariate to predi…
▽ More
Motivated by a potential-outcomes perspective, the idea of principal stratification has been widely recognized for its relevance in settings susceptible to posttreatment selection bias such as randomized clinical trials where treatment received can differ from treatment assigned. In one such setting, we address subtleties involved in inference for causal effects when using a key covariate to predict membership in latent principal strata. We show that when treatment received can differ from treatment assigned in both study arms, incorporating a stratum-predictive covariate can make estimates of the "complier average causal effect" (CACE) derive from observations in the two treatment arms with different covariate distributions. Adopting a Bayesian perspective and using Markov chain Monte Carlo for computation, we develop posterior checks that characterize the extent to which incorporating the pretreatment covariate endangers estimation of the CACE. We apply the method to analyze a clinical trial comparing two treatments for jaw fractures in which the study protocol allowed surgeons to overrule both possible randomized treatment assignments based on their clinical judgment and the data contained a key covariate (injury severity) predictive of treatment received.
△ Less
Submitted 7 November, 2011;
originally announced November 2011.
