Observational data have become a popular source of evidence for causal effects when no randomized controlled trial exists, or to supplement information provided by those. In practice, a wide range of designs and analytical choices exist, and one recent approach relies on the target trial emulation framework. This framework is particularly well suited to mimic what could be obtained in a specific randomized controlled trial, while avoiding time-related selection biases. In this abstract, we present how this framework could be useful to emulate trials in malignant melanoma, and the challenges faced when planning such a study using longitudinal observational data from a cohort study. More specifically, two questions are envisaged: duration of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and trials comparing treatment strategies for BRAF V600-mutant patients (targeted therapy as 1st line, followed by immunotherapy as 2nd line, vs. immunotherapy as 2nd line followed by targeted therapy as 1st line). Using data from 1027 participants to the MELBASE cohort, we detail the results for the emulation of a trial where immune checkpoint inhibitor would be stopped at 6 months vs. continued, in patients in response or with stable disease.

The assumed data generating models (response distributions) of experimental or observational data in cognitive science have become increasingly complex over the past decades. This trend follows a revolution in model estimation methods and a drastic increase in computing power available to researchers. Today, higher-level cognitive functions can well be captured by and understood through computational cognitive models, a common example being drift diffusion models for decision processes. Such models are often expressed as the combination of two modeling layers. The first layer is the response distribution with corresponding distributional parameters tailored to the cognitive process under investigation. The second layer are latent models of the distributional parameters that capture how those parameters vary as a function of design, stimulus, or person characteristics, often in an additive manner. Such cognitive models can thus be understood as special cases of distributional regression models where multiple distributional parameters, rather than just a single centrality parameter, are predicted by additive models. Because of their complexity, distributional models are quite complicated to estimate, but recent advances in Bayesian estimation methods and corresponding software make them increasingly more feasible. In this talk, I will speak about the specification, estimation, and post-processing of Bayesian distributional regression models and how they can help to better understand cognitive processes.