ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2022
Estimation of the Average Causal Effect in Longitudinal Data With Time-Varying Exposures: The Challenge of Nonpositivity and the Impact of Model Flexibility.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten-year subtype survival and systemic-therapy pathways analysis after breast-cancer recurrence in the LACRN MPBC multicountry cohort study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Adaptive Sparsening and Smoothing of the Treatment Model for Longitudinal Causal Inference Using Outcome-Adaptive LASSO and Marginal Fused LASSO.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Near-Positivity Violations on IPTW-Estimated Marginal Structural Survival Models With Time-Dependent Confounding.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025Article
- Is Checking for Sequential Positivity Violations Getting You Down? Try sPoRT!Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are important challenges to the estimation and identification of average causal effects in longitudinal data with time-varying exposures. Here, we discuss the difficulty in meeting the positivity condition. Our motivating example is the per-protocol analysis of the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction (EAGeR) Trial. We estimated the average causal effect comparing the incidence of pregnancy by 26 weeks that would have occurred if all women had been assigned to aspirin and complied versus the incidence if all women had been assigned to placebo and complied. Using flexible targeted minimum loss-based estimation, we estimated a risk difference of 1.27% (95% CI: -9.83, 12.38). Using a less flexible inverse probability weighting approach, the risk difference was 5.77% (95% CI: -1.13, 13.05). However, the cumulative probability of compliance conditional on covariates approached 0 as follow-up accrued, indicating a practical violation of the positivity assumption, which limited our ability to make causal interpretations. The effects of nonpositivity were more apparent when using a more flexible estimator, as indicated by the greater imprecision. When faced with nonpositivity, one can use a flexible approach and be transparent about the uncertainty, use a parametric approach and smooth over gaps in the data, or target a different estimand that will be less vulnerable to positivity violations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.