Curious why statisticians recommend including the outcome in your imputation models? Check out our new paper in Statistical Methods in Medical Research! @SarahLotspeich, @StatStaci5, and I show with some simple mathematical derivations why this is really a requirement!
There’s a bit of a twist, though! It turns out if you’re doing *deterministic* imputation you should NOT include the outcome in the imputation model, with stochastic imputation methods you must!
📣Our 🆕 paper Causal Inference is Not Just a Statistics Problem is out! @malco_barrett, @travisgerke, and I show that you can have 4 data sets with identical summary stats & visuals but very different data generating mechanisms-statistics alone can't tell you what to adjust for!
📦 We simulated a "Causal Quartet" (in the spirit of Ansombe's Quartet & others!) to demonstrate this phenomenon that you (or your students!) can play with in the {quartets} #rstats package
🎙️ On this weeks episode we talk about a “Causal Quartet” a set of four datasets generated under different mechanisms, all with the same statistical summaries (including visualizations!) but different true causal effects
Given a single dataset with 3 variables: exposure, outcome and covariate (z) how can statistics help you decide whether to adjust for z? It can’t! The correlation between z and the exposure in all 4 datasets is 0.7!
Dec 12, 2022 • 18 tweets • 5 min read
For this month's @AmJEpi tweetorial, I am going to walk through @jerudolph13, @eschisterman1, and @ashley_naimi's excellent simulation study comparing inverse probability weighting (IPW) and G-computation in survival analysis
doi.org/10.1093/aje/kw…
First let's get some context! They built their simulation based on *real* trial data, the EAGeR Trial (designed to evaluate the relationship between low-dose aspirin use and several pregnancy outcomes). They used the distributions in this data to build the simulated variables