In medicine, treatments often influence multiple, interdependent outcomes, such as primary endpoints, complications, adverse events, or other secondary endpoints. Hence, to make optimal treatment decisions, clinicians are interested in learning the distribution of multi-dimensional treatment outcomes. However, the vast majority of machine learning methods for predicting treatment effects focus on single-outcome settings, despite the fact that medical data often include multiple, interdependent outcomes. To address this limitation, we propose a novel diffusion-based method called DIME to learn the joint distribution of multiple outcomes of medical treatments. We addresses three challenges relevant in medical practice: (i)it is tailored to learn the joint interventional distribution of multiple medical outcomes, which enables reliable decision-making with uncertainty quantification rather than relying solely on point estimates; (ii)it explicitly captures the dependence structure between outcomes; (iii)it can handle outcomes of mixed type, including binary, categorical, and continuous variables. In DIME, we take into account the fundamental problem of causal inference through causal masking. For training, our method decomposes the joint distribution into a series of conditional distributions with a customized conditional masking to account for the dependence structure across outcomes. For inference, our method auto-regressively generates predictions. This allows our method to move beyond point estimates of causal quantities and thus learn the joint interventional distribution. To the best of our knowledge, DIME is the first neural method tailored to learn the joint, multi-outcome distribution of medical treatments. Across various experiments, we demonstrate that our method effectively learns the joint distribution and captures shared information among multiple outcomes.

Evaluating the causal impacts of possible interventions is crucial for informing decision-making, especially towards improving access to opportunity. However, if causal effects are heterogeneous and predictable from covariates, personalized treatment decisions can improve individual outcomes and contribute to both efficiency and equity. In practice, however, causal researchers do not have a single outcome in mind a priori and often collect multiple outcomes of interest that are noisy estimates of the true target of interest. For example, in government-assisted social benefit programs, policymakers collect many outcomes to understand the multidimensional nature of poverty. The ultimate goal is to learn an optimal treatment policy that in some sense maximizes multiple outcomes simultaneously. To address such issues, we present a data-driven dimensionality-reduction methodology for multiple outcomes in the context of optimal policy learning with multiple objectives. We learn a low-dimensional representation of the true outcome from the observed outcomes using reduced rank regression. We develop a suite of estimates that use the model to denoise observed outcomes, including commonly-used index weightings. These methods improve estimation error in policy evaluation and optimization, including on a case study of real-world cash transfer and social intervention data. Reducing the variance of noisy social outcomes can improve the performance of algorithmic allocations.

With the evolution of single-cell RNA sequencing techniques into a standard approach in genomics, it has become possible to conduct cohort-level causal inferences based on single-cell-level measurements. However, the individual gene expression levels of interest are not directly observable; instead, only repeated proxy measurements from each individual's cells are available, providing a derived outcome to estimate the underlying outcome for each of many genes. In this paper, we propose a generic semiparametric inference framework for doubly robust estimation with multiple derived outcomes, which also encompasses the usual setting of multiple outcomes when the response of each unit is available. To reliably quantify the causal effects of heterogeneous outcomes, we specialize the analysis to standardized average treatment effects and quantile treatment effects. Through this, we demonstrate the use of the semiparametric inferential results for doubly robust estimators derived from both Von Mises expansions and estimating equations. A multiple testing procedure based on Gaussian multiplier bootstrap is tailored for doubly robust estimators to control the false discovery exceedance rate. Applications in single-cell CRISPR perturbation analysis and individual-level differential expression analysis demonstrate the utility of the proposed methods and offer insights into the usage of different estimands for causal inference in genomics.

Assessing causal effects in the presence of unobserved confounding is a challenging problem. Existing studies leveraged proxy variables or multiple treatments to adjust for the confounding bias. In particular, the latter approach attributes the impact on a single outcome to multiple treatments, allowing estimating latent variables for confounding control. Nevertheless, these methods primarily focus on a single outcome, whereas in many real-world scenarios, there is greater interest in studying the effects on multiple outcomes. Besides, these outcomes are often coupled with multiple treatments. Examples include the intensive care unit (ICU), where health providers evaluate the effectiveness of therapies on multiple health indicators. To accommodate these scenarios, we consider a new setting dubbed as multiple treatments and multiple outcomes. We then show that parallel studies of multiple outcomes involved in this setting can assist each other in causal identification, in the sense that we can exploit other treatments and outcomes as proxies for each treatment effect under study. We proceed with a causal discovery method that can effectively identify such proxies for causal estimation. The utility of our method is demonstrated in synthetic data and sepsis disease.

Today we are excited to announce that two AI builder preview capabilities are now generally available. Features that are generally available are considered production ready. Both new capabilities can be found under the Prediction model card in AI Builder. One of them is prediction of multiple outcomes, and the other is prediction of a numerical field. These new features make the prediction model richer, and be able to solve more business problems for you.

Heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs) are commonly identified during randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Identifying subgroups of patients with similar treatment effects is of high interest in clinical research to advance precision medicine. Often, multiple clinical outcomes are measured during an RCT, each having a potentially heterogeneous effect. Recently there has been high interest in identifying subgroups from HTEs, however, there has been less focus on developing tools in settings where there are multiple outcomes. In this work, we propose a framework for partitioning the covariate space to identify subgroups across multiple outcomes based on the joint CIs. We test our algorithm on synthetic and semi-synthetic data where there are two outcomes, and demonstrate that our algorithm is able to capture the HTE in both outcomes simultaneously.

Internet companies are increasingly using machine learning models to create personalized policies which assign, for each individual, the best predicted treatment for that individual. They are frequently derived from black-box heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) models that predict individual-level treatment effects. In this paper, we focus on (1) learning explanations for HTE models; (2) learning interpretable policies that prescribe treatment assignments. We also propose guidance trees, an approach to ensemble multiple interpretable policies without the loss of interpretability. These rule-based interpretable policies are easy to deploy and avoid the need to maintain a HTE model in a production environment.

Imagine this scenario: In a clinical trial investigating the toxicity of a new chemotherapy drug to treat breast cancer, some patients drop out of the trial before completion for various reasons, hence we do not have the data for final outcome on the dropped out patients. What if the patients who drop out of the trial before completion are the ones who experienced toxicity and are unwilling to continue the treatment, this reason however is not recorded in the database and the patients are marked as "lost to followup". If the investigators were to analyze the data using conventional methods where loss to followup is ignored and not properly accounted for, they will estimate the toxicity to be far less than what it really is. These results can lead to adapting a drug, that is otherwise unsafe. Similarly if patients who are feeling better dropout of the trial before completion, the estimates of toxicity would be far greater than the real value, leading to rejection of a potential lifesaver drug.

A giant wave, digital in origin, is ready to surge our shores. Back in July I hinted at this tsunami of shiny new objects that will take the form of new realities and new ways to generate intelligence for marketing execution. The call to action around these efforts–especially augmented and virtual realities, AI-infused chat, and voice assistants–is to prepare yourself for another round of "lead or follow" decision making. Some new research supports how these emerging interfaces are going to matter, and soon. Who is on this leading edge of exploration?