Causal inference for clinicians

Steven D Stovitz, Ian Shrier

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) calls on clinicians to incorporate the 'best available evidence' into clinical decision-making. For decisions regarding treatment, the best evidence is that which determines the causal effect of treatments on the clinical outcomes of interest. Unfortunately, research often provides evidence where associations are not due to cause-and-effect, but rather due to non-causal reasons. These non-causal associations may provide valid evidence for diagnosis or prognosis, but biased evidence for treatment effects. Causal inference aims to determine when we can infer that associations are or are not due to causal effects. Since recommending treatments that do not have beneficial causal effects will not improve health, causal inference can advance the practice of EBM. The purpose of this article is to familiarise clinicians with some of the concepts and terminology that are being used in the field of causal inference, including graphical diagrams known as ' causal directed acyclic graphs'. In order to demonstrate some of the links between causal inference methods and clinical treatment decision-making, we use a clinical vignette of assessing treatments to lower cardiovascular risk. As the field of causal inference advances, clinicians familiar with the methods and terminology will be able to improve their adherence to the principles of EBM by distinguishing causal effects of treatment from results due to non-causal associations that may be a source of bias.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)109-112
Number of pages4
JournalBMJ evidence-based medicine
Volume24
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2019

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Medicine
Terminology
Health
Research
Clinical Decision-Making

Keywords

  • epidemiology
  • statistics

Cite this

Causal inference for clinicians. / Stovitz, Steven D; Shrier, Ian.

In: BMJ evidence-based medicine, Vol. 24, No. 3, 01.06.2019, p. 109-112.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stovitz, Steven D ; Shrier, Ian. / Causal inference for clinicians. In: BMJ evidence-based medicine. 2019 ; Vol. 24, No. 3. pp. 109-112.
@article{ada5399166644518944a3331b8598a3e,
title = "Causal inference for clinicians",
abstract = "Evidence-based medicine (EBM) calls on clinicians to incorporate the 'best available evidence' into clinical decision-making. For decisions regarding treatment, the best evidence is that which determines the causal effect of treatments on the clinical outcomes of interest. Unfortunately, research often provides evidence where associations are not due to cause-and-effect, but rather due to non-causal reasons. These non-causal associations may provide valid evidence for diagnosis or prognosis, but biased evidence for treatment effects. Causal inference aims to determine when we can infer that associations are or are not due to causal effects. Since recommending treatments that do not have beneficial causal effects will not improve health, causal inference can advance the practice of EBM. The purpose of this article is to familiarise clinicians with some of the concepts and terminology that are being used in the field of causal inference, including graphical diagrams known as ' causal directed acyclic graphs'. In order to demonstrate some of the links between causal inference methods and clinical treatment decision-making, we use a clinical vignette of assessing treatments to lower cardiovascular risk. As the field of causal inference advances, clinicians familiar with the methods and terminology will be able to improve their adherence to the principles of EBM by distinguishing causal effects of treatment from results due to non-causal associations that may be a source of bias.",
keywords = "epidemiology, statistics",
author = "Stovitz, {Steven D} and Ian Shrier",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111069",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "109--112",
journal = "BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine",
issn = "2515-446X",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Causal inference for clinicians

AU - Stovitz, Steven D

AU - Shrier, Ian

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Evidence-based medicine (EBM) calls on clinicians to incorporate the 'best available evidence' into clinical decision-making. For decisions regarding treatment, the best evidence is that which determines the causal effect of treatments on the clinical outcomes of interest. Unfortunately, research often provides evidence where associations are not due to cause-and-effect, but rather due to non-causal reasons. These non-causal associations may provide valid evidence for diagnosis or prognosis, but biased evidence for treatment effects. Causal inference aims to determine when we can infer that associations are or are not due to causal effects. Since recommending treatments that do not have beneficial causal effects will not improve health, causal inference can advance the practice of EBM. The purpose of this article is to familiarise clinicians with some of the concepts and terminology that are being used in the field of causal inference, including graphical diagrams known as ' causal directed acyclic graphs'. In order to demonstrate some of the links between causal inference methods and clinical treatment decision-making, we use a clinical vignette of assessing treatments to lower cardiovascular risk. As the field of causal inference advances, clinicians familiar with the methods and terminology will be able to improve their adherence to the principles of EBM by distinguishing causal effects of treatment from results due to non-causal associations that may be a source of bias.

AB - Evidence-based medicine (EBM) calls on clinicians to incorporate the 'best available evidence' into clinical decision-making. For decisions regarding treatment, the best evidence is that which determines the causal effect of treatments on the clinical outcomes of interest. Unfortunately, research often provides evidence where associations are not due to cause-and-effect, but rather due to non-causal reasons. These non-causal associations may provide valid evidence for diagnosis or prognosis, but biased evidence for treatment effects. Causal inference aims to determine when we can infer that associations are or are not due to causal effects. Since recommending treatments that do not have beneficial causal effects will not improve health, causal inference can advance the practice of EBM. The purpose of this article is to familiarise clinicians with some of the concepts and terminology that are being used in the field of causal inference, including graphical diagrams known as ' causal directed acyclic graphs'. In order to demonstrate some of the links between causal inference methods and clinical treatment decision-making, we use a clinical vignette of assessing treatments to lower cardiovascular risk. As the field of causal inference advances, clinicians familiar with the methods and terminology will be able to improve their adherence to the principles of EBM by distinguishing causal effects of treatment from results due to non-causal associations that may be a source of bias.

KW - epidemiology

KW - statistics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061669791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061669791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111069

DO - 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111069

M3 - Article

C2 - 30765385

AN - SCOPUS:85061669791

VL - 24

SP - 109

EP - 112

JO - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

JF - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

SN - 2515-446X

IS - 3

ER -