This research demonstrates heterogeneity in surrogate outcomes in observational data, suggesting implications for public health.
Surrogate markers are most commonly studied within the context of randomized clinical trials. However, the need for alternative outcomes also extends to real-world public health and social science research, where randomized trials are often impractical. While standard methods for evaluating surrogate markers largely rely on the assumption of randomized treatment, there is a significant gap in applying these techniques to observational data, where the central challenge shifts to managing confounding. The few methods that do allow for non-randomized treatment/exposure do not offer a way to examine surrogate heterogeneity with respect to patient characteristics. In this paper, we propose a framework to assess surrogate heterogeneity in non-randomized data and implement this framework using meta-learners. Our approach allows us to quantify heterogeneity in surrogate strength with respect to patient characteristics while accommodating confounders through the use of flexible, off-the-shelf machine learning methods. In addition, we use our framework to identify covariate profiles where the surrogate is a valid replacement of the primary outcome. We examine the performance of our methods via a simulation study and application to examine heterogeneity in the surrogacy of hemoglobin A1c as a surrogate for fasting plasma glucose.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Knowlton et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: