Cargando…

Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction

Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are often used to guide treatment initiation, with individuals at high risk offered treatment. This implicitly assumes that the probability quoted from a CPM represents the risk to an individual of an adverse outcome in absence of treatment. However, for a CPM to co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sperrin, Matthew, Diaz-Ordaz, Karla, Pajouheshnia, Romin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8485150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33595073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwab030
_version_ 1784577478262521856
author Sperrin, Matthew
Diaz-Ordaz, Karla
Pajouheshnia, Romin
author_facet Sperrin, Matthew
Diaz-Ordaz, Karla
Pajouheshnia, Romin
author_sort Sperrin, Matthew
collection PubMed
description Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are often used to guide treatment initiation, with individuals at high risk offered treatment. This implicitly assumes that the probability quoted from a CPM represents the risk to an individual of an adverse outcome in absence of treatment. However, for a CPM to correctly target this estimand requires careful causal thinking. One problem that needs to be overcome is treatment drop-in: where individuals in the development data commence treatment after the time of prediction but before the outcome occurs. In this issue of the Journal, Xu et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(10):2000–2014) use causal estimates from external data sources, such as clinical trials, to adjust CPMs for treatment drop-in. This represents a pragmatic and promising approach to address this issue, and it illustrates the value of utilizing causal inference in prediction. Building causality into the prediction pipeline can also bring other benefits. These include the ability to make and compare hypothetical predictions under different interventions, to make CPMs more explainable and transparent, and to improve model generalizability. Enriching CPMs with causal inference therefore has the potential to add considerable value to the role of prediction in healthcare.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8485150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84851502021-10-01 Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction Sperrin, Matthew Diaz-Ordaz, Karla Pajouheshnia, Romin Am J Epidemiol Invited Commentary Clinical prediction models (CPMs) are often used to guide treatment initiation, with individuals at high risk offered treatment. This implicitly assumes that the probability quoted from a CPM represents the risk to an individual of an adverse outcome in absence of treatment. However, for a CPM to correctly target this estimand requires careful causal thinking. One problem that needs to be overcome is treatment drop-in: where individuals in the development data commence treatment after the time of prediction but before the outcome occurs. In this issue of the Journal, Xu et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(10):2000–2014) use causal estimates from external data sources, such as clinical trials, to adjust CPMs for treatment drop-in. This represents a pragmatic and promising approach to address this issue, and it illustrates the value of utilizing causal inference in prediction. Building causality into the prediction pipeline can also bring other benefits. These include the ability to make and compare hypothetical predictions under different interventions, to make CPMs more explainable and transparent, and to improve model generalizability. Enriching CPMs with causal inference therefore has the potential to add considerable value to the role of prediction in healthcare. Oxford University Press 2021-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8485150/ /pubmed/33595073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwab030 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Invited Commentary
Sperrin, Matthew
Diaz-Ordaz, Karla
Pajouheshnia, Romin
Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title_full Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title_fullStr Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title_full_unstemmed Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title_short Invited Commentary: Treatment Drop-in—Making the Case for Causal Prediction
title_sort invited commentary: treatment drop-in—making the case for causal prediction
topic Invited Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8485150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33595073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwab030
work_keys_str_mv AT sperrinmatthew invitedcommentarytreatmentdropinmakingthecaseforcausalprediction
AT diazordazkarla invitedcommentarytreatmentdropinmakingthecaseforcausalprediction
AT pajouheshniaromin invitedcommentarytreatmentdropinmakingthecaseforcausalprediction