Policy makers often need to estimate the long-term effects of newly-developed treatments, while only having historical data of older treatment options. We propose a surrogate-based approach using a long-term dataset where only past treatments were administered and a short-term dataset where novel treatments have been administered.

Policy makers typically face the problem of wanting to estimate the long-term effects of novel treatments, while only having historical data of older treatment options. We assume access to a long-term dataset where only past treatments were administered and a short-term dataset where novel treatments have been administered. We propose a surrogate based approach where we assume that the long-term effect is channeled through a multitude of available short-term proxies. Our work combines three major recent techniques in the causal machine learning literature: surrogate indices, dynamic treatment effect estimation and double machine learning, in a unified pipeline. We show that our method is consistent and provides root-n asymptotically normal estimates under a Markovian assumption on the data and the observational policy. We use a data-set from a major corporation that includes customer investments over a three year period to create a semi-synthetic data distribution where the major qualitative properties of the real dataset are preserved. We evaluate the performance of our method and discuss practical challenges of deploying our formal methodology and how to address them.

Decision-makers often want to target interventions (e.g., marketing campaigns) so as to maximize an outcome that is observed only in the long-term. This typically requires delaying decisions until the outcome is observed or relying on simple short-term proxies for the long-term outcome. Here we build on the statistical surrogacy and off-policy learning literature to impute the missing long-term outcomes and then approximate the optimal targeting policy on the imputed outcomes via a doubly-robust approach. We apply our approach in large-scale proactive churn management experiments at The Boston Globe by targeting optimal discounts to its digital subscribers to maximize their long-term revenue. We first show that conditions for validity of average treatment effect estimation with imputed outcomes are also sufficient for valid policy evaluation and optimization; furthermore, these conditions can be somewhat relaxed for policy optimization. We then validate this approach empirically by comparing it with a policy learned on the ground truth long-term outcomes and show that they are statistically indistinguishable. Our approach also outperforms a policy learned on short-term proxies for the long-term outcome. In a second field experiment, we implement the optimal targeting policy with additional randomized exploration, which allows us to update the optimal policy for each new cohort of customers to account for potential non-stationarity. Over three years, our approach had a net-positive revenue impact in the range of $4-5 million compared to The Boston Globe's current policies.

Estimating the long-term effects of treatments is of interest in many fields. A common challenge in estimating such treatment effects is that long-term outcomes are unobserved in the time frame needed to make policy decisions. One approach to overcome this missing data problem is to analyze treatments effects on an intermediate outcome, often called a statistical surrogate, if it satisfies the condition that treatment and outcome are independent conditional on the statistical surrogate. The validity of the surrogacy condition is often controversial. Here we exploit that fact that in modern datasets, researchers often observe a large number, possibly hundreds or thousands, of intermediate outcomes, thought to lie on or close to the causal chain between the treatment and the long-term outcome of interest. Even if none of the individual proxies satisfies the statistical surrogacy criterion by itself, using multiple proxies can be useful in causal inference. We focus primarily on a setting with two samples, an experimental sample containing data about the treatment indicator and the surrogates and an observational sample containing information about the surrogates and the primary outcome. We state assumptions under which the average treatment effect be identified and estimated with a high-dimensional vector of proxies that collectively satisfy the surrogacy assumption, and derive the bias from violations of the surrogacy assumption, and show that even if the primary outcome is also observed in the experimental sample, there is still information to be gained from using surrogates.