Literature DB >> 29988991

Measuring Model Misspecification: Application to Propensity Score Methods with Complex Survey Data.

David Lenis1, Benjamin Ackerman1, Elizabeth A Stuart1,2,3.   

Abstract

Model misspecification is a potential problem for any parametric-model based analysis. However, the measurement and consequences of model misspecification have not been well formalized in the context of causal inference. A measure of model misspecification is proposed, and the consequences of model misspecification in non-experimental causal inference methods are investigated. The metric is then used to explore which estimators are more sensitive to misspecification of the outcome and/or treatment assignment model. Three frequently used estimators of the treatment effect are considered, all of which rely on the propensity score: (1) full matching, (2) 1:1 nearest neighbor matching, and (3) weighting. The performance of these estimators is evaluated under two different sampling designs: (1) simple random sampling (SRS) and (2) a two-stage stratified survey. As the degree of misspecification of either the propensity score or outcome model increases, so does the bias and the root mean square error, while the coverage decreases. Results are similar for the simple random sample and a complex survey design.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Causal Inference; Complex Survey Data; Model Misspecification; Non-experimental study; Propensity Score Matching; Treatment on the Treated Weighting

Year:  2018        PMID: 29988991      PMCID: PMC6034692          DOI: 10.1016/j.csda.2018.05.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal        ISSN: 0167-9473            Impact factor:   1.681


  12 in total

1.  Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Stuart
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 2.901

2.  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

3.  Propensity Score Analysis with Survey Weighted Data.

Authors:  Greg Ridgeway; Stephanie Ann Kovalchik; Beth Ann Griffin; Mohammed U Kabeto
Journal:  J Causal Inference       Date:  2015-05-14

4.  Assessing the sensitivity of methods for estimating principal causal effects.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Stuart; Booil Jo
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Propensity score techniques and the assessment of measured covariate balance to test causal associations in psychological research.

Authors:  Valerie S Harder; Elizabeth A Stuart; James C Anthony
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2010-09

6.  A Note on Adapting Propensity Score Matching and Selection Models to Choice Based Samples.

Authors:  James J Heckman; Petra E Todd
Journal:  Econom J       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.571

7.  An Introduction to Propensity Score Methods for Reducing the Effects of Confounding in Observational Studies.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2011-06-08       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  It's all about balance: propensity score matching in the context of complex survey data.

Authors:  David Lenis; Trang Quynh Nguyen; Nianbo Dong; Elizabeth A Stuart
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 5.279

9.  The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Propensity score matching and complex surveys.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Nathaniel Jembere; Maria Chiu
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 3.021

View more
  4 in total

1.  Are cannabis users less likely to gain weight? Results from a national 3-year prospective study.

Authors:  Omayma Alshaarawy; James C Anthony
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  On the Use of Covariate Supersets for Identification Conditions.

Authors:  Paul N Zivich; Bonnie E Shook-Sa; Jessie K Edwards; Daniel Westreich; Stephen R Cole
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 4.860

3.  A machine learning compatible method for ordinal propensity score stratification and matching.

Authors:  Thomas J Greene; Stacia M DeSantis; Derek W Brown; Anna V Wilkinson; Michael D Swartz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  Machine learning for improving high-dimensional proxy confounder adjustment in healthcare database studies: An overview of the current literature.

Authors:  Richard Wyss; Chen Yanover; Tal El-Hay; Dimitri Bennett; Robert W Platt; Andrew R Zullo; Grammati Sari; Xuerong Wen; Yizhou Ye; Hongbo Yuan; Mugdha Gokhale; Elisabetta Patorno; Kueiyu Joshua Lin
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 2.732

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.