Skip to main content
Log in

Time to Consider Time, and Time to Predict?

  • Published:
Statistics in Biosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the important but often neglected role which time has in the statistical treatment of causal problems. Another motivation is to provide a demonstration of how the tools offered by Bayesian modeling and inference, which likewise seem to have largely been ignored in the mainstream statistical literature on causality, can be usefully applied in this context. To offer a concrete example, I consider a particular problem, exploring the effect which the type of day care appears to have on the incidence of acute middle ear infections in small children. Existing epidemiological knowledge is used in setting up a stochastic model, which is formulated in terms of a suitably defined marked point process and applying non-parametric specification of model components where such prior knowledge seems vague. In this context, the important role of the concept of local independence is stressed. A combination of Bayesian inferential methods and an application of MCMC sampling in the numerical work are then shown to lead to immediately useful and understandable quantitative results, formulated in terms of predictive distributions of future observables. The approach adopted here differs in several respects from those currently considered standard in causal modeling and inference. The paper ends with some conclusions of a general nature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aalen OO (1989) A linear regression model for the analysis of life times. Stat Med 8:907–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aalen OO, Borgan Ø, Gjessing H (2008) Survival and event history analysis: a point process view. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Aalen OO, Borgan Ø, Keiding N, Thormann J (1980) Interaction between life history events: nonparametric analysis of prospective and retrospective data in the presence of censoring. Scand J Stat 7:161–171

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Aalen OO, Roysland K, Gran JM, Ledergerber B (2012) Causality, mediation and time: A dynamic viewpoint. J R Stat Soc A 175:831–861

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Andersen PK, Borgan Ø, Gill RD, Keiding N (1993) Statistical models based on counting processes. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Andreev A, Arjas E (1998) Acute middle ear infection in small children: A Bayesian analysis using multiple time scales. Lifetime Data Anal 4:121–137

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Arjas E (1985) Contribution to the discussion on the paper by PK Andersen and Ø Borgan. Scand J Stat 12:150–153

    Google Scholar 

  8. Arjas E (2012) Causal inference from observational data: A Bayesian predictive approach. In: Berzuini C, Dawid AP, Bernardinelli L (eds) Causality: statistical perspectives and applications. Wiley, New York, pp 71–84

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Arjas E, Andreev A (2000) Predictive inference, causal reasoning, and model assessment in nonparametric Bayesian analysis: A case study. Lifetime Data Anal 6:187–205

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Arjas E, Haara P (1984) A marked point process approach to censored failure time data with complicated covariates. Scand J Stat 11:193–209

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Arjas E, Liu L (1995) Assessing the losses caused by an industrial intervention: a hierarchical Bayesian approach. Appl Stat 44:357–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Arjas E, Parner J (2004) Causal reasoning from longitudinal data (with a discussion). Scand J Stat 31:171–201

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Arjas E, Saarela O (2010) Optimal dynamic regimes: Presenting a case for predictive inference. Int J Biostat 6:10

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Commenges D, Gégout-Petit A (2009) A general dynamical statistical model with causal interpretation. J R Stat Soc B 71:719–736

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Commenges D, Gégout-Petit A (2010) A general definition of influence between stochastic processes. Lifetime Data Anal 16:33–44

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Dawid AP (2002) Influence diagrams for causal modelling and inference. Int Stat Rev 70:161–189

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Didelez V (2008) Graphical models for marked point processes based on local independence. J R Stat Soc B 70:245–264

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB (2002) Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 58:21–29

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Hernán MA, Robins JM (2006) Estimating causal effects from epidemiological data. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:578–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jacod J (1975) Multivariate point processes: Predictable projection, Radon–Nikodym derivatives, representation of martingales. Z Wahrscheinlichkeitstheor Verw Geb 31:235–253

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. McCandless LC, Gustafson P, Austin PC (2009) Bayesian propensity score analysis for observational data. Stat Med 15:94–112

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Parner J, Arjas E (1999) Causal reasoning from longitudinal data. Research Report A 27, Rolf Nevanlinna Institute, Helsinki (available at http://wiki.helsinki.fi/display/biometry/Elja+Arjas)

  23. Pearl J (1993) Comment: Graphical models, causality and intervention. Stat Sci 8:266–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pearl J (1995) Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrika 82:669–710

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Robins JM (1986) A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—Applications to control of the healthy workers survivor effect. Math Model 7:1393–1512

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70:41–55

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Rubin DB (1974) Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J Educ Psychol 66:688–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rue H, Martino S, Chopin N (2009) Approximate Bayesian inference for latent Gaussian models by using integrated nested Laplace approximations. J R Stat Soc B 71:319–392

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Saarela O, Arjas E (2011) A method for Bayesian monotonic multiple regression. Scand J Stat 38:499–513

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Schweder T (1970) Composable Markov processes. J Appl Probab 7:400–410

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elja Arjas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arjas, E. Time to Consider Time, and Time to Predict?. Stat Biosci 6, 189–203 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-013-9101-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-013-9101-1

Keywords

Navigation