Sihui Zhao | arXiv Science

arXiv2026

Adjusting for Many Covariates in Randomized Clinical Trials with GLMs: Bias Reduction by Jackknife and Practical Guidance

Adjusting for baseline covariates has become standard practice in analyzing randomized clinical trials. In the low-dimensional setting, it is well understood that covariate adjustment through a parametric working model can sometimes be more efficient than the unadjusted difference-in-mean estimator. However, when the number of adjusted covariates is large relative to the sample size $n$, a naïve adjustment may introduce excessive bias, leading to invalid statistical inference. The current literature that tries to resolve this issue is either limited to linear working models or relies on sample splitting, which may raise concerns about the replicability of RCT analyses. In this paper, we devise a novel jackknife-based approach to covariate adjustment through generalized linear models (GLMs), which we term as JAckknife Score-based Adjustment (JASA), together with its calibrated version JASACal. By employing a nuanced jackknife strategy, JASA and JASACal avoid sample splitting and make full use of the data, while ensuring that the bias of JASA or JASACal is still negligible even when the number of adjusted covariates is large compared to $n$. JASA also encompasses state-of-the-art adjusted estimators through linear working models as a special case. Through extensive simulation experiments and a real data analysis, we demonstrate that JASA or JASACal can adjust for a much greater number of covariates than existing benchmarks. These empirical results also shed some new light on practical guidance for covariate adjustment with GLMs. Both JASA and JASACal have been incorporated into our R package HOIFCar available from CRAN. The package HOIFCar is developed to serve as a user-friendly option for covariate adjustment in RCTs, in particular when practitioners hope to adjust for a large number of covariates.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Covariate Adjustment in Randomized Experiments Motivated by Higher-Order Influence Functions

Higher-Order Influence Functions (HOIF), developed in a series of papers over the past twenty years, are a fundamental theoretical device for constructing rate-optimal causal-effect estimators from observational studies. However, the value of HOIF for analyzing well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCT) has not been explicitly explored. In the recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency guidelines on the practice of covariate adjustment in analyzing RCT, in addition to the simple, unadjusted difference-in-mean estimator, it was also recommended to report the estimator adjusting for baseline covariates via a simple parametric working model, such as a linear model. However, when the number of baseline covariates $p$ is large, the recommendation is somewhat murky. In this paper, we show that HOIF-motivated estimators for the treatment-specific mean have significantly improved statistical properties compared to popular adjusted estimators in practice when $p$ is relatively large relative to the sample size $n$. We also characterize the conditions under which the HOIF-motivated estimator improves upon the unadjusted one. More importantly, we demonstrate that several state-of-the-art adjusted estimators proposed recently can be interpreted as particular HOIF-motivated estimators, thereby placing these estimators in a more unified framework. Numerical and empirical studies are conducted to corroborate our theoretical findings. An accompanying R package can be found on CRAN.

stat.ME↗