Skip to content

Author

David McCoy

1 paper indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Preprint Aug 2026

Targeted Deep Survival Contrasts: Valid Inference for Treatment-Specific Survival Benefit with Neural Networks

Neural survival models are increasingly asked to support counterfactual claims---how much a treatment would change survival in a population---rather than only prognostic risk scores. Answering such questions from observational data requires valid inference for treatment-specific survival contrasts under confounding and covariate-dependent censoring, targets for which standard deep survival estimators are biased and provide no honest uncertainty. We propose Targeted Deep Survival Contrasts (TDSC), which extends Targeted Deep Architectures (TDA)---targeted maximum likelihood estimation embedded in a network's weight space---to the full vector of treatment-specific survival curves over a time grid, and hence to the benefit curve and the restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference. A single universal targeting path, one ridge projection of the stacked efficient influence functions onto closed-form last-layer gradients per iteration, simultaneously solves the projected estimating equations for all coordinates; a one-step residual top-up converts the plug-in into a doubly robust estimator of the unrestricted target; and a multiplier bootstrap yields simultaneous confidence bands for the benefit curve. We prove joint asymptotic linearity, band validity, and double robustness of the top-up for a cross-fitted variant requiring no Donsker conditions. Across seven Monte Carlo banks with confounded treatment, sign-varying effect heterogeneity, and dependent censoring, the TDSC plug-in attains nominal pointwise and simultaneous coverage with 35% lower MSE than a per-timepoint one-step (AIPCW) built from the same nuisance fits. Under a badly wrong outcome model the plug-in tracks its working parameter and its intervals fail (44% coverage), while the top-up restores nominal inference for the unrestricted causal target (94-95%)---and in-sample diagnostics separate the two regimes.

David McCoy, Yi Li · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.