Missing data are a pervasive issue in observational studies using electronic health records or patient registries. It presents unique challenges for statistical inference, especially causal inference. Inappropriately handling missing data in causal inference could potentially bias causal estimation. Besides missing data problems, observational health data structures typically have mixed-type variables - continuous and categorical covariates - whose joint distribution is often too complex to be modeled by simple parametric models. The existence of missing values in covariates and outcomes makes the causal inference even more challenging, while most standard causal inference approaches assume fully observed data or start their works after imputing missing values in a separate preprocessing stage. To address these problems, we introduce a Bayesian nonparametric causal model to estimate causal effects with missing data. The proposed approach can simultaneously impute missing values, account for multiple outcomes, and estimate causal effects under the potential outcomes framework. We provide three simulation studies to show the performance of our proposed method under complicated data settings whose features are similar to our case studies. For example, Simulation Study 3 assumes the case where missing values exist in both outcomes and covariates. Two case studies were conducted applying our method to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatments for chronic disease management in juvenile idiopathic arthritis and cystic fibrosis.

Multivariate functional data arise in a wide range of applications. One fundamental task is to understand the causal relationships among these functional objects of interest. In this paper, we develop a novel Bayesian network (BN) model for multivariate functional data where conditional independencies and causal structure are encoded by a directed acyclic graph. Specifically, we allow the functional objects to deviate from Gaussian processes, which is the key to unique causal structure identification even when the functions are measured with noises. A fully Bayesian framework is designed to infer the functional BN model with natural uncertainty quantification through posterior summaries. Simulation studies and real data examples demonstrate the practical utility of the proposed model.

We consider the problem of optimizing treatment allocation for statistical efficiency in randomized clinical trials. Optimal allocation has been studied previously for simple treatment effect estimators such as the sample mean difference, which are not fully efficient in the presence of baseline covariates. More efficient estimators can be obtained by incorporating covariate information, and modern machine learning methods make it increasingly feasible to approach full efficiency. Accordingly, we derive the optimal allocation ratio by maximizing the design efficiency of a randomized trial, assuming that an efficient estimator will be used for analysis. We then expand the scope of optimization by considering covariate-dependent randomization (CDR), which has some flavor of an observational study but provides the same level of scientific rigor as a standard randomized trial. We describe treatment effect estimators that are consistent, asymptotically normal, and (nearly) efficient under CDR, and derive the optimal propensity score by maximizing the design efficiency of a CDR trial (under the assumption that an efficient estimator will be used for analysis). Our optimality results translate into optimal designs that improve upon standard practice. Real-world examples and simulation results demonstrate that the proposed designs can produce substantial efficiency improvements in realistic settings.

The restricted mean time in favor (RMT-IF) of treatment has just been added to the analytic toolbox for composite endpoints of recurrent events and death. To help practitioners design new trials based on this method, we develop tools to calculate the sample size and power. Specifically, we formulate the outcomes as a multistate Markov process with a sequence of transient states for recurrent events and an absorbing state for death. The transition intensities, in this case the instantaneous risks of another nonfatal event or death, are assumed to be time-homogeneous but nonetheless allowed to depend on the number of past events. Using the properties of Coxian distributions, we derive the RMT-IF effect size under the alternative hypothesis as a function of the treatment-to-control intensity ratios along with the baseline intensities, the latter of which can be easily estimated from historical data. We also reduce the variance of the nonparametric RMT-IF estimator to calculable terms under a standard set-up for censoring. Simulation studies show that the resulting formulas provide accurate approximation to the sample size and power in realistic settings. For illustration, a past cardiovascular trial with recurrent-hospitalization and mortality outcomes is analyzed to generate the parameters needed to design a future trial. The procedures are incorporated into the rmt package along with the original methodology on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).

Many recent efforts center on assessing the ability of real-world evidence (RWE) generated from non-randomized, observational data to produce results compatible with those from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). One noticeable endeavor is the RCT DUPLICATE initiative. To better reconcile findings from an observational study and an RCT, or two observational studies based on different databases, it is desirable to eliminate differences between study populations. We outline an efficient, network-flow-based statistical matching algorithm that designs well-matched pairs from observational data that resemble the covariate distributions of a target population, for instance, the target-RCT-eligible population in the RCT DUPLICATE initiative studies or a generic population of scientific interest. We demonstrate the usefulness of the method by revisiting the inconsistency regarding a cardioprotective effect of the hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) clinical trial and corresponding observational study. We found that the discrepancy between the trial and observational study persisted in a design that adjusted for the difference in study populations' cardiovascular risk profile, but seemed to disappear in a study design that further adjusted for the difference in HRT initiation age and previous estrogen-plus-progestin use. The proposed method is integrated into the R package match2C.

We consider the problem of testing multiple null hypotheses, where a decision to reject or retain must be made for each one and embedding incorrect decisions into a real-life context may inflict different losses. We argue that traditional methods controlling the Type I error rate may be too restrictive in this situation and that the standard familywise error rate may not be appropriate. Using a decision-theoretic approach, we define suitable loss functions for a given decision rule, where incorrect decisions can be treated unequally by assigning different loss values. Taking expectation with respect to the sampling distribution of the data allows us to control the familywise expected loss instead of the conventional familywise error rate. Different loss functions can be adopted, and we search for decision rules that satisfy certain optimality criteria within a broad class of decision rules for which the expected loss is bounded by a fixed threshold under any parameter configuration. We illustrate the methods with the problem of establishing efficacy of a new medicinal treatment in non-overlapping subgroups of patients.

Often, comparative experiments involve a single treatment factor and two blocking factors, for example, augmented row-column, two-phase, and incomplete row-column experiments. These experiments are widely used in agriculture. Finding good designs for these experiments is a major challenge when the number of treatments is large and the blocking structure is complex. In this paper, we first propose a new search algorithm that is combined with efficient update formulae, so that optimal designs with two blocking factors can be found within a reasonable time. Second, we compare augmented row-column designs generated with our new method to those obtained from CycDesigN, DiGGer, and the OPTEX procedure of SAS in terms of computing times as well as the quality of solutions. Third, we illustrate our proposed approach with four applications. We show an example where our efficient update formulae work while existing update formulae cannot be applied, and we use our search framework to generate augmented row-column, two-phase, and incomplete row-column designs. We end the paper with a conclusion along with suggestions for potential applications.

To optimize the use of data from a small number of subjects in rare disease trials, an at first sight advantageous design is the repeated measures cross-over design. However, it is unclear how these within-treatment period and within-subject clustered data are best analyzed in small-sample trials. In a real-data simulation study based upon a recent epidermolysis bullosa simplex trial using this design, we compare non-parametric marginal models, generalized pairwise comparison models, GEE-type models and parametric model averaging for both repeated binary and count data. The recommendation of which methodology to use in rare disease trials with a repeated measures cross-over design depends on the type of outcome and the number of time points the treatment has an effect on. The non-parametric marginal model testing the treatment-time-interaction effect is suitable for detecting between group differences in the shapes of the longitudinal profiles. For binary outcomes with the treatment effect on a single time point, the parametric model averaging method is recommended, while in the other cases the unmatched generalized pairwise comparison methodology is recommended. Both provide an easily interpretable effect size measure, and do not require exclusion of periods or subjects due to incompleteness.

We develop a proportional incidence model that estimates vaccine effectiveness (VE) at the population level using conditional likelihood for aggregated data. Our model assumes that the population counts of clinical outcomes for an infectious disease arise from a superposition of Poisson processes with different vaccination statuses. The intensity function in the model is calculated as the product of per capita incidence rate and the at-risk population size, both of which are time-dependent. We formulate a log-linear regression model with respect to the relative risk, defined as the ratio between the per capita incidence rates of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. In the regression analysis, we treat the baseline incidence rate as a nuisance parameter, similar to the Cox proportional hazard model in survival analysis. We then apply the proposed models and methods to age-stratified weekly counts of COVID-19-related hospital and ICU admissions among adults in Ontario, Canada. The data spanned from 2021 to February 2022, encompassing the Omicron era and the rollout of booster vaccine doses. We also discuss the limitations and confounding effects while advocating for the necessity of more comprehensive and up-to-date individual-level data that document the clinical outcomes and measure potential confounders.

In an observational study of the effects caused by a treatment, a second control group is used in an effort to detect bias from unmeasured covariates, and the investigator is content if no evidence of bias is found. This strategy is not entirely satisfactory: two control groups may differ significantly, yet the difference may be too small to invalidate inferences about the treatment, or the control groups may not differ yet nonetheless fail to provide a tangible strengthening of the evidence of a treatment effect. Is a firmer conclusion possible? Is there a way to analyze a second control group such that the data might report measurably strengthened evidence of cause and effect, that is, insensitivity to larger unmeasured biases? Evidence factor analyses are not commonly used with a second control group: most analyses compare the treated group to each control group, but analyses of that kind are partially redundant; so, they do not constitute evidence factors. An alternative analysis is proposed here, one that does yield two evidence factors, and with a carefully designed test statistic, is capable of extracting strong evidence from the second factor. The new technical work here concerns the development of a test statistic with high design sensitivity and high Bahadur efficiency in a sensitivity analysis for the second factor. A study of binge drinking as a cause of high blood pressure is used as an illustration.