Continuous Treatment Effects with Surrogate Outcomes

In many causal inference applications, the primary outcomes are missing for a non-trivial number of observations. For instance, in studies on long-term health effects of medical interventions, some measurements require expensive testing and a loss to follow-up is common (Hogan et al., 2004). In evaluating commercial online ad effectiveness, some individuals may drop out from the panel because they use multiple devices (Shankar et al., 2023), leading to missing revenue measures. In many of these studies, however, there often exist short-term outcomes that are easier and faster to measure, e.g., short-term health measures or an online ad's click-through rate, that are observed for a greater share of the sample. These outcomes, which are typically informative about the primary outcomes themselves, are refered to as surrogate outcomes or surrogates. There is a rich causal inference literature addressing missing outcome data. Simply restricting to data with observed primary outcomes may induce strong bias (Hernán and Robins, 2010). Ignoring unlabeled data also reduces the effective sample size for estimating the treatment effects and inflates the variance. Chakrabortty et al. (2022) considered the missing completely at random (MCAR) setting and showed that incorporating unlabeled data reduces variance.