Literature DB >> 20161511

Improving efficiency and robustness of the doubly robust estimator for a population mean with incomplete data.

Weihua Cao1, Anastasios A Tsiatis, Marie Davidian.   

Abstract

Considerable recent interest has focused on doubly robust estimators for a population mean response in the presence of incomplete data, which involve models for both the propensity score and the regression of outcome on covariates. The usual doubly robust estimator may yield severely biased inferences if neither of these models is correctly specified and can exhibit nonnegligible bias if the estimated propensity score is close to zero for some observations. We propose alternative doubly robust estimators that achieve comparable or improved performance relative to existing methods, even with some estimated propensity scores close to zero.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20161511      PMCID: PMC2798744          DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asp033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrika        ISSN: 0006-3444            Impact factor:   2.445


  5 in total

1.  Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology.

Authors:  J M Robins; M A Hernán; B Brumback
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.

Authors:  Jared K Lunceford; Marie Davidian
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.

Authors:  Heejung Bang; James M Robins
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Comment: Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Anastasios A Tsiatis; Marie Davidian
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.901

5.  Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice.

Authors:  D B Rubin; N Thomas
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.571

  5 in total
  43 in total

1.  The relative performance of targeted maximum likelihood estimators.

Authors:  Kristin E Porter; Susan Gruber; Mark J van der Laan; Jasjeet S Sekhon
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 0.968

2.  Leveraging prognostic baseline variables to gain precision in randomized trials.

Authors:  Elizabeth Colantuoni; Michael Rosenblum
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Introduction to Double Robust Methods for Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Shaun R Seaman; Stijn Vansteelandt
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 2.901

4.  Improved double-robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.

Authors:  Andrea Rotnitzky; Quanhong Lei; Mariela Sued; James M Robins
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2012-04-29       Impact factor: 2.445

5.  Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) for Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: Results From the Validation Cohort.

Authors:  Steven Z George; Jason M Beneciuk; Trevor A Lentz; Samuel S Wu; Yunfeng Dai; Joel E Bialosky; Giorgio Zeppieri
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-04-07       Impact factor: 4.751

6.  Using a monotone single-index model to stabilize the propensity score in missing data problems and causal inference.

Authors:  Jing Qin; Tao Yu; Pengfei Li; Hao Liu; Baojiang Chen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Pseudo-population bootstrap methods for imputed survey data.

Authors:  S Chen; D Haziza; C Léger; Z Mashreghi
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 2.445

8.  Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.

Authors:  Brady Thomas West; Sean Esteban McCabe
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Mark-specific hazard ratio model with missing multivariate marks.

Authors:  Michal Juraska; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 1.588

10.  Test the reliability of doubly robust estimation with missing response data.

Authors:  Baojiang Chen; Jing Qin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.