Abstract
A standard assumption for causal inference from observational data is that one has measured a sufficiently rich set of covariates to ensure that within covariate strata, subjects are exchangeable across observed treatment values. Skepticism about the exchangeability assumption in observational studies is often warranted because it hinges on investigators’ ability to accurately measure covariates capturing all potential sources of confounding. Realistically, confounding mechanisms can rarely if ever, be learned with certainty from measured covariates. One can therefore only ever hope that covariate measurements are at best proxies of true underlying confounding mechanisms operating in an observational study, thus invalidating causal claims made on basis of standard exchangeability conditions. Causal learning from proxies is a challenging inverse problem which has to date remained unresolved. In this paper, we introduce a formal potential outcome framework for proximal causal learning, which while explicitly acknowledging covariate measurements as imperfect proxies of confounding mechanisms, offers an opportunity to learn about causal effects in settings where exchangeability on the basis of measured covariates fails. Sufficient conditions for nonparametric identification are given, leading to the proximal g-formula and corresponding proximal g-computation algorithm for estimation. These may be viewed as generalizations of Robins’ foundational g-formula and g-computation algorithm, which account explicitly for bias due to unmeasured confounding. Both point treatment and time-varying treatment settings are considered, and an application of proximal g-computation of causal effects is given for illustration.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by NIH funding to ETT
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
These are secondary analyses that are de-identified and are publicly available.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are available upon request to the first author