Causal rule ensemble method for estimating heterogeneous treatment effect with consideration of prognostic effects.

We propose a novel framework based on the RuleFit method to estimate heterogeneous treatment effect in randomized clinical trials. The proposed method estimates a rule ensemble comprising a set of prognostic rules, a set of prescriptive rules, as well as the linear effects of the original predictor variables. The prescriptive rules provide an interpretable description of the heterogeneous treatment effect. By including a prognostic term in the proposed model, the selected rule is represented as an heterogeneous treatment effect that excludes other effects. We confirmed that the performance of the proposed method was equivalent to that of other ensemble learning methods through numerical simulations and demonstrated the interpretation of the proposed method using a real data application.

Concordance rate of a four-quadrant plot for repeated measurements.

BACKGROUND: To assure the equivalence between new clinical measurement methods and the standard methods, the four-quadrant plot and the plot's concordance rate is used in clinical practice, along with Bland-Altman analysis. The conventional concordance rate does not consider the correlation among the data on individual subjects, which may affect its proper evaluation. METHODS: We propose a new concordance rate for the four-quadrant plot based on multivariate normal distribution to take into account the covariance within each individual subject. The proposed concordance rate is formulated as the conditional probability of the agreement. It contains a parameter to set the minimum concordant number between two measurement methods, which is regarded as agreement. This parameter allows flexibility in the interpretation of the results. RESULTS: Through numerical simulations, the AUC value of the proposed method was 0.967, while that of the conventional concordance rate was 0.938. In the application to a real example, the AUC value of the proposed method was 0.999 and that of the conventional concordance rate was 0.964. CONCLUSION: From the results of numerical simulations and a real example, the proposed concordance rate showed better accuracy and higher diagnosability than the conventional approaches.