Training and Validating a Treatment Recommender with Partial Verification Evidence

Vishnu Unnikrishnan; Clara Puga; Miro Schleicher; Uli Niemann; Berthod Langguth; Stefan Schoisswohl; Birgit Mazurek; Rilana Cima; Jose Antonio Lopez-Escamez; Dimitris Kikidis; Eleftheria Vellidou; Ruediger Pryss; Winfried Schlee; Myra Spiliopoulou

arXiv · 2406.06654

Training and Validating a Treatment Recommender with Partial Verification Evidence

Vishnu Unnikrishnan·Clara Puga·Miro Schleicher·Uli Niemann·Berthod Langguth·Stefan Schoisswohl·Birgit Mazurek·Rilana Cima·Jose Antonio Lopez-Escamez·Dimitris Kikidis·Eleftheria Vellidou·Ruediger Pryss·Winfried Schlee·Myra Spiliopoulou

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Current clinical decision support systems (DSS) are trained and validated on observational data from the target clinic. This is problematic for treatments validated in a randomized clinical trial (RCT), but not yet introduced in any clinic. In this work, we report on a method for training and validating the DSS using the RCT data. The key challenges we address are of missingness -- missing rationale for treatment assignment (the assignment is at random), and missing verification evidence, since the effectiveness of a treatment for a patient can only be verified (ground truth) for treatments what were actually assigned to a patient. We use data from a multi-armed RCT that investigated the effectiveness of single- and combination- treatments for 240+ tinnitus patients recruited and treated in 5 clinical centers. To deal with the 'missing rationale' challenge, we re-model the target variable (outcome) in order to suppress the effect of the randomly-assigned treatment, and control on the effect of treatment in general. Our methods are also robust to missing values in features and with a small number of patients per RCT arm. We deal with 'missing verification evidence' by using counterfactual treatment verification, which compares the effectiveness of the DSS recommendations to the effectiveness of the RCT assignments when they are aligned v/s not aligned. We demonstrate that our approach leverages the RCT data for learning and verification, by showing that the DSS suggests treatments that improve the outcome. The results are limited through the small number of patients per treatment; while our ensemble is designed to mitigate this effect, the predictive performance of the methods is affected by the smallness of the data. We provide a basis for the establishment of decision supporting routines on treatments that have been tested in RCTs but have not yet been deployed clinically.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Clara Puga, Miro Schleicher, Uli Niemann, Berthod Langguth, Stefan Schoisswohl, Birgit Mazurek, Rilana Cima, Jose Antonio Lopez-Escamez, Dimitris Kikidis, Eleftheria Vellidou, Ruediger Pryss, Winfried Schlee, Myra Spiliopoulou. 2024-06-10. Training and Validating a Treatment Recommender with Partial Verification Evidence. https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.06654

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗