首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Epidemiology >DAG-informed regression modelling agent-based modelling and microsimulation modelling: a critical comparison of methods for causal inference
【2h】

DAG-informed regression modelling agent-based modelling and microsimulation modelling: a critical comparison of methods for causal inference

机译:DAG信息回归建模基于主体的建模和微观模拟建模:因果推理方法的重要比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The current paradigm for causal inference in epidemiology relies primarily on the evaluation of counterfactual contrasts via statistical regression models informed by graphical causal models (often in the form of directed acyclic graphs, or DAGs) and their underlying mathematical theory. However, there have been growing calls for supplementary methods, and one such method that has been proposed is agent-based modelling due to its potential for simulating counterfactuals. However, within the epidemiological literature, there currently exists a general lack of clarity regarding what exactly agent-based modelling is (and is not) and, importantly, how it differs from microsimulation modelling—perhaps its closest methodological comparator. We clarify this distinction by briefly reviewing the history of each method, which provides a context for their similarities and differences, and casts light on the types of research questions that they have evolved (and thus are well suited) to answering; we do the same for DAG-informed regression methods. The distinct historical evolutions of DAG-informed regression modelling, microsimulation modelling and agent-based modelling have given rise to distinct features of the methods themselves, and provide a foundation for critical comparison. Not only are the three methods well suited to addressing different types of causal questions, but, in doing so, they place differing levels of emphasis on fixed and random effects, and also tend to operate on different timescales and in different timeframes.
机译:流行病学中因果关系推理的当前范例主要依靠通过图形因果关系模型(通常以有向无环图或DAG的形式)提供的统计回归模型及其基础数学理论对反事实对比进行评估。但是,人们对辅助方法的呼声日益高涨,由于基于代理的建模具有模拟反事实的潜力,因此已提出了一种基于代理的建模方法。但是,在流行病学文献中,对于基于代理的建模到底是(以及不是),以及重要的是,它与微观仿真建模有何不同(也许是最接近的方法比较器),目前普遍缺乏明确性。我们通过简要回顾每种方法的历史来澄清这种区别,这为它们的相似性和差异提供了背景,并阐明了它们已经发展(因此非常适合)回答的研究问题的类型;我们对DAG信息回归方法也是如此。 DAG信息回归模型,微观模拟模型和基于主体的模型的独特历史演变为方法本身带来了独特的特征,并为关键的比较提供了基础。三种方法不仅非常适合解决不同类型的因果问题,而且在这样做时,它们对固定效应和随机效应的重视程度不同,并且倾向于在不同的时间范围和不同的时间范围内运行。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号