» Articles » PMID: 11890317

Principal Stratification in Causal Inference

Overview
Journal Biometrics
Specialty Public Health
Date 2002 Mar 14
PMID 11890317
Citations 356
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Many scientific problems require that treatment comparisons be adjusted for posttreatment variables, but the estimands underlying standard methods are not causal effects. To address this deficiency, we propose a general framework for comparing treatments adjusting for posttreatment variables that yields principal effects based on principal stratification. Principal stratification with respect to a posttreatment variable is a cross-classification of subjects defined by the joint potential values of that posttreatment variable tinder each of the treatments being compared. Principal effects are causal effects within a principal stratum. The key property of principal strata is that they are not affected by treatment assignment and therefore can be used just as any pretreatment covariate. such as age category. As a result, the central property of our principal effects is that they are always causal effects and do not suffer from the complications of standard posttreatment-adjusted estimands. We discuss briefly that such principal causal effects are the link between three recent applications with adjustment for posttreatment variables: (i) treatment noncompliance, (ii) missing outcomes (dropout) following treatment noncompliance. and (iii) censoring by death. We then attack the problem of surrogate or biomarker endpoints, where we show, using principal causal effects, that all current definitions of surrogacy, even when perfectly true, do not generally have the desired interpretation as causal effects of treatment on outcome. We go on to forrmulate estimands based on principal stratification and principal causal effects and show their superiority.

Citing Articles

Cancer gene identification through integrating causal prompting large language model with omics data-driven causal inference.

Zeng H, Yin C, Chai C, Wang Y, Dai Q, Sun H Brief Bioinform. 2025; 26(2).

PMID: 40072848 PMC: 11899576. DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbaf113.


A General Framework to Assess Complex Heterogeneity in the Strength of a Surrogate Marker.

Knowlton R, Tian L, Parast L Stat Med. 2025; 44(5):e70001.

PMID: 39915898 PMC: 11835199. DOI: 10.1002/sim.70001.


Evaluating effects of meal delivery on the ability of homebound older adults to remain in the community via a pragmatic, two-arm, randomized comparative effectiveness trial: study protocol for the Deliver-EE trial.

Thomas K, Bernard K, Clark M, Dionne L, Fisher A, Gadbois E Trials. 2024; 25(1):787.

PMID: 39574158 PMC: 11583665. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08635-3.


An Automated Approach to Causal Inference in Discrete Settings.

Duarte G, Finkelstein N, Knox D, Mummolo J, Shpitser I J Am Stat Assoc. 2024; 119(547):1778-1793.

PMID: 39553407 PMC: 11566246. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2023.2216909.


Improving precision of vaccine efficacy evaluation using immune correlate data in time-to-event models.

Dudasova J, Valenta Z, Sachs J NPJ Vaccines. 2024; 9(1):214.

PMID: 39528514 PMC: 11554669. DOI: 10.1038/s41541-024-00937-6.


References
1.
Prentice R . Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. Stat Med. 1989; 8(4):431-40. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780080407. View

2.
Rubin D . More powerful randomization-based p-values in double-blind trials with non-compliance. Stat Med. 1998; 17(3):371-85; discussion 387-9. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980215)17:3<371::aid-sim768>3.0.co;2-o. View

3.
Freedman L, Graubard B, Schatzkin A . Statistical validation of intermediate endpoints for chronic diseases. Stat Med. 1992; 11(2):167-78. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780110204. View

4.
Ellenberg J . Biostatistical collaboration in medical research. Biometrics. 1990; 46(1):1-18; discussion 19-32. View

5.
. Influence of adherence to treatment and response of cholesterol on mortality in the coronary drug project. N Engl J Med. 1980; 303(18):1038-41. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198010303031804. View