{"title":"因果比效应的定义和识别。","authors":"Christoph Kiefer, Benedikt Lugauer, Axel Mayer","doi":"10.1037/met0000711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In generalized linear models, the effect of a treatment or intervention is often expressed as a ratio (e.g., risk ratio and odds ratio). There is discussion about when ratio effect measures can be interpreted in a causal way. For example, ratio effect measures suffer from noncollapsibility, that is, even in randomized experiments, the average over individual ratio effects is not identical to the (unconditional) ratio effect based on group means. Even more, different ratio effect measures (e.g., simple ratio and odds ratio) can point into different directions regarding the effectiveness of the treatment making it difficult to decide which one is the causal effect of interest. While causality theories do in principle allow for ratio effects, the literature lacks a comprehensive derivation and definition of ratio effect measures and their possible identification from a causal perspective (including, but not restricted to randomized experiments). In this article, we show how both simple ratios and odds ratios can be defined based on the stochastic theory of causal effects. Then, we examine if and how expectations of these effect measures can be identified under four causality conditions. Finally, we discuss an alternative computation of ratio effects as ratios of causally unbiased expectations instead of expectations of individual ratios, which is identifiable under all causality conditions and consistent with difference effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Kiefer, Benedikt Lugauer, Axel Mayer\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/met0000711\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In generalized linear models, the effect of a treatment or intervention is often expressed as a ratio (e.g., risk ratio and odds ratio). There is discussion about when ratio effect measures can be interpreted in a causal way. For example, ratio effect measures suffer from noncollapsibility, that is, even in randomized experiments, the average over individual ratio effects is not identical to the (unconditional) ratio effect based on group means. Even more, different ratio effect measures (e.g., simple ratio and odds ratio) can point into different directions regarding the effectiveness of the treatment making it difficult to decide which one is the causal effect of interest. While causality theories do in principle allow for ratio effects, the literature lacks a comprehensive derivation and definition of ratio effect measures and their possible identification from a causal perspective (including, but not restricted to randomized experiments). In this article, we show how both simple ratios and odds ratios can be defined based on the stochastic theory of causal effects. Then, we examine if and how expectations of these effect measures can be identified under four causality conditions. Finally, we discuss an alternative computation of ratio effects as ratios of causally unbiased expectations instead of expectations of individual ratios, which is identifiable under all causality conditions and consistent with difference effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000711\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000711","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在广义线性模型中,治疗或干预的效果通常表示为比率(例如,风险比和优势比)。本文还讨论了比率效应测量何时可以用因果方式解释。例如,比率效应度量存在不可折叠性,即即使在随机实验中,个体的平均比率效应与基于群体均值的(无条件)比率效应并不相同。更重要的是,不同的比率效应测量(例如,简单比和优势比)可以指向治疗有效性的不同方向,这使得很难确定哪一个是感兴趣的因果效应。虽然因果关系理论原则上允许比率效应,但文献缺乏对比率效应度量的全面推导和定义,以及从因果角度(包括但不限于随机实验)对其可能的识别。在本文中,我们将展示如何根据因果效应的随机理论来定义简单比和优势比。然后,我们研究了在四种因果关系条件下是否以及如何确定这些效果措施的期望。最后,我们讨论了比率效应作为因果无偏期望的比率而不是单个比率的期望的替代计算,这在所有因果关系条件下都是可识别的,并且与差异效应一致。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,版权所有)。
Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.
In generalized linear models, the effect of a treatment or intervention is often expressed as a ratio (e.g., risk ratio and odds ratio). There is discussion about when ratio effect measures can be interpreted in a causal way. For example, ratio effect measures suffer from noncollapsibility, that is, even in randomized experiments, the average over individual ratio effects is not identical to the (unconditional) ratio effect based on group means. Even more, different ratio effect measures (e.g., simple ratio and odds ratio) can point into different directions regarding the effectiveness of the treatment making it difficult to decide which one is the causal effect of interest. While causality theories do in principle allow for ratio effects, the literature lacks a comprehensive derivation and definition of ratio effect measures and their possible identification from a causal perspective (including, but not restricted to randomized experiments). In this article, we show how both simple ratios and odds ratios can be defined based on the stochastic theory of causal effects. Then, we examine if and how expectations of these effect measures can be identified under four causality conditions. Finally, we discuss an alternative computation of ratio effects as ratios of causally unbiased expectations instead of expectations of individual ratios, which is identifiable under all causality conditions and consistent with difference effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.