Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two Simple Models for Observational Studies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design of Observational Studies

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Statistics ((SSS))

Abstract

Observational studies differ from experiments in that randomization is not used to assign treatments. How were treatments assigned? This chapter introduces two simple models for treatment assignment in observational studies. The first model is useful but naïve: it says that people who look comparable are comparable. The second model speaks to a central concern in observational studies: people who look comparable in the observed data may not actually be comparable; they may differ in ways we did not observe.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abadie, A. : Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. Rev Econ Stud 72, 1–19 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Angrist, J.D., Krueger, A.B.: Empirical strategies in labor economics. In: Ashenfelter, O., Card, D. (eds.) Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3, pp. 1277–1366. New York: Elsevier (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Angrist, J. D., Lavy, V.: Using Maimonides’ rule to estimate the effect of class size on scholastic achievement. Q J Econ 114, 533–575 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angrist, J., Hahn, J. : When to control for covariates? Panel asymptotics for estimates of treatment effects. Rev Econ Statist 86, 58–72 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Athey, S., Imbens, G.W.: Identification and inference in nonlinear difference-in-differences models. Econometrica 74, 431–497 (2006)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., Mullainathan, S.: How much should we trust difference-in-differences estimates? Q J Econ 119, 249–275 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Besley, T., Case, A.: Unnatural experiments? Estimating the incidence of endogenous policies. Econ J 110, 672–694 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bross, I.D.J.: Statistical criticism. Cancer 13, 394–400 (1961)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bross, I.D.J.: Spurious effects from an extraneous variable. J Chron Dis 19, 637–647 (1966)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T.: Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psych Bull 54, 297–312 (1957)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T.: Reforms as experiments. Am Psychol 409–429 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T.: Methodology and Epistemology for Social Science: Selected Papers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  • Copas, J.B., Li, H.G.: Inference for non-random samples. J Roy Statist Soc B 59, 55–77 (1997)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Copas, J.B., Eguchi, S.: Local sensitivity approximations for selectivity bias. J Roy Statist Soc B 63, 871–896 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cornfield, J., Haenszel, W., Hammond, E., Lilienfeld, A., Shimkin, M., Wynder, E. : Smoking and lung cancer: Recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. J Natl Cancer Instit 22, 173–203 (1959)

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Agostino, R.B.: Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statist Med 17, 2265–2281 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawid, A.P.: Conditional independence in statistical theory (with Discussion). J Roy Statist Soc B 41, 1–31 (1979)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Dehejia, R.H., Wahba, S.: Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Rev Econ Statist 84, 151–161 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diprete, T.A., Gangl, M.: Assessing bias in the estimation of causal effects. Sociolog Method 34, 271–310 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dynarski, S.M.: Does aid matter? Measuring the effect of student aid on college attendance and completion. Am Econ Rev 93, 279–288 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenech, M., Changb, W.P., Kirsch-Voldersc, M., Holland, N., Bonassie, S., Zeiger, E.: HUMN project: Detailed description of the scoring criteria for the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay using isolated human lymphocyte cultures. Mutat Res 534, 65–75 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, E.M., Bickman, L.: Old wine in new skins: The sensitivity of established findings to new methods. Eval Rev 3, 281–306 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frangakis, C.E., Rubin, D.B.: Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 58, 21–29 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gastwirth, J.L.: Methods for assessing the sensitivity of comparisons in Title VII cases to omitted variables. Jurimetrics J 33, 19–34 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gastwirth, J.L., Krieger, A.M., Rosenbaum, P.R.: Dual and simultaneous sensitivity analysis for matched pairs. Biometrika 5, 907–920 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gastwirth, J.L., Krieger, A.M., Rosenbaum, P.R.: Asymptotic separability in sensitivity analysis. J Roy Statist Soc B 2, 545–555 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Greevy, R., Lu, B., Silber, J.H., Rosenbaum, P.R.: Optimal matching before randomization. Biostatistics 5, 263–275 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Greenland, S.: Basic methods of sensitivity analysis. Int J Epidemiol 25, 1107–1116 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, D.B., Souleles, N.S.: Do liquidity constraints and interest rates matter for consumer behavior? Evidence from credit card data. Q J Econ 117, 149–185 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, J.Y.: On the role of the propensity score in efficient semiparametric estimation of average treatment effects. Econometrica 66, 315–331 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hamermesh, D.S.: The craft of labormetrics. Indust Labor Relat Rev 53, 363–380 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, B.B.: The prognostic analogue of the propensity score. Biometrika 95, 481–488 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Haviland, A., Nagin, D.S., Rosenbaum, P.R.: Combining propensity score matching and group-based trajectory analysis in an observational study. Psych Methods 2, 247–267 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haviland, A.M., Nagin, D.S., Rosenbaum, P.R., Tremblay, R.E.: Combining group-based trajectory modeling and propensity score matching for causal inferences in nonexperimental longitudinal data. Devel Psych 44, 422–436 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirano, K., Imbens, G.W., Ridder, G.: Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica 71, 1161–1189 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A.B.: The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proc Roy Soc Med 58, 295–300 (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J.L., Waldfogel, J., Brooks-Gunn, J., Han, W.J.: Maternal employment and child development: A fresh look using newer methods. Devel Psychol 41, 833–850 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, D.E., Imai, K., King, G., Stuart, E.A.: Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Polit Anal 15, 199–236 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Agency for Research on Cancer: IARC Monographs on the Valuation of Carcinogenic Risks of Chemicals to Humans: Chromium, Nickel and Welding, Volume 49, pp. 447–525. Lyon: IARC (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai, K.: Statistical analysis of randomized experiments with non-ignorable missing binary outcomes: an application to a voting experiment. Appl Statist 58, 83–104 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G.W.: The role of the propensity score in estimating dose response functions. Biometrika 87, 706–710 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G.W.: Sensitivity to exogeneity assumptions in program evaluation. Am Econ Rev 93, 126–132 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G.W. : Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Rev Econ Statist 86, 4–29 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G.W., Wooldridge, J.M.: Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. J Econ Lit 47, 5–86 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joffe, M.M., Ten Have, T.R., Feldman, H.I., Kimmel, S.E.: Model selection, confounder control, and marginal structural models: Review and new applications. Am Statistician 58, 272–279 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B.A., Tsiatis, A.A.: Estimating mean response as a function of treatment duration in an observational study, where duration may be informatively censored. Biometrics 60, 315–323 (2004)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Katan, M.B.: Commentary: Mendelian randomization, 18 years on. Int J Epidemiol 33, 10–11 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keele, L.J.: Rbounds: An R Package for Sensitivity Analysis with Matched Data. http://www.polisci.ohio-state.edu/faculty/lkeele/rbounds.html

  • Lee, M.J., Lee, S.J.: Sensitivity analysis of job-training effects on reemployment for Korean women. Empiric Econ 36, 81–107 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, D.Y., Psaty, B.M., Kronmal, R.A.: Assessing sensitivity of regression to unmeasured confounders in observational studies. Biometrics 54, 948–963 (1998)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, B., Rosenbaum, P.R.: Optimal matching with two control groups. J Comput Graph Statist 13, 422–434 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.: Nonparametric bounds on treatment effects. Am Econ Rev 80, 319–323 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.F. : Identification Problems in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.F., Nagin, D.S.: Bounding disagreements about treatment effects: a case study of sentencing and recidivism. Sociol Method 8, 99–137 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, S.M.: Using omitted variable bias to assess uncertainty in the estimation of an AIDS education treatment effect. J Educ Behav Statist 22, 193–201 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey, D.F., Ridgeway, G., Morral, A.R.: Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies. Psych Meth 9, 403–425 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKillip, J.: Research without control groups: A control construct design. In: Methodological Issues in Applied Social Psychology, F. B. Bryant, et al., eds., New York: Plenum Press, pp. 159–175 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B.D.: Natural and quasi-experiments in economics. J Business Econ Statist 13, 151–161 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, N. Heitjan, D.F.: Sensitivity of the hazard ratio to nonignorable treatment assignment in an observational study. Statist Med 26, 1398–1414 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Normand, S-L., Landrum, M.B., Guadagnoli, E., Ayanian, J.Z., Ryan, T.J., Cleary, P.D., McNeil, B.J.: Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: A matched analysis using propensity scores. J Clin Epidemiol 54, 387–398 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Normand, S-L., Sykora, K., Li, P., Mamdani, M., Rochon, P.A., Anderson, G.M.: Readers guide to critical appraisal of cohort studies: 3. Analytical strategies to reduce confounding. Brit Med J 330, 1021–1023 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagano, M., Tritchler, D.: On obtaining permutation distributions in polynomial time. J Am Statist Assoc 78, 435–440 (1983)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, K.D., West, S.G.: A multiplist strategy for strengthening nonequivalent control group designs. Eval Rev 11, 691–714 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J.M., Mark, S.D., Newey, W.K.: Estimating exposure effects by modeling the expectation of exposure conditional on confounders. Biometrics 48, 479–495 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J.M., Ritov, Y.: Toward a curse of dimensionality appropriate (CODA) asymptotic theory for semi-parametric models. Statist Med 16, 285–319 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J.M., Rotnitzky, A., Scharfstein, D.: Sensitivity analysis for selection bias and unmeasured confounding in missing data and causal inference models. In: Statistical Models in Epidemiology, E. Halloran and D. Berry, eds., pp. 1–94. New York: Springer (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Rubin, D.B.: The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70, 41–55 (1983)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., Rubin, D.B.: Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. J Roy Statist Soc B 45, 212–218 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Conditional permutation tests and the propensity score in observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc 79, 565–574 (1984)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Rubin, D.B.: Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Statist Assoc 79, 516–524 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Rubin, D.B. : Constructing a control group by multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Statistician 39, 33–38 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., Rubin, D.B.: The bias due to incomplete matching. Biometrics 41, 106–116 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Dropping out of high school in the United States: An observational study. J Educ Statist 1, 207–224 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Sensitivity analysis for certain permutation inferences in matched observational studies. Biometrika 74, 13–26 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: The role of a second control group in an observational study (with Discussion). Statist Sci 2, 292–316 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Model-based direct adjustment. J Am Statist Assoc 2, 387–394 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: The role of known effects in observational studies. Biometrics 45, 557–569 (1989)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: On permutation tests for hidden biases in observational studies. Ann Statist 17, 643–653 (1989)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Krieger, A.M.: Sensitivity analysis for two-sample permutation inferences in observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc 5, 493–498 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Hodges-Lehmann point estimates in observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc 88, 1250–1253 (1993)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Quantiles in nonrandom samples and observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc 90, 1424–1431 (1995)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Signed rank statistics for coherent predictions. Biometrics 53, 556–566 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Choice as an alternative to control in observational studies (with Discussion). Statist Sci 14, 259–304 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Stability in the absence of treatment. J Am Statist Assoc 96, 210–219 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Observational Studies (2nd ed.). New York: Springer (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Covariance adjustment in randomized experiments and observational studies (with Discussion). Statist Sci 17, 286–327 (2002)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Design sensitivity in observational studies. Biometrika 91, 153–164 (2004)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R.: Heterogeneity and causality: Unit heterogeneity and design sensitivity in observational studies. Am Statistician 59, 147–152 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R.: Sensitivity analysis for m-estimates, tests, and confidence intervals in matched observational studies. Biometrics 63, 456–464 (2007)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Silber, J.H.: Sensitivity analysis for equivalence and difference in an observational study of neonatal intensive care units. J Am Statist Assoc 104, 501–511 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R., Silber, J.H.: Amplification of sensitivity analysis in observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, M.R., Wolpin, K.I.: Natural ‘natural experiments’ in economics. J Econ Lit 38, 827–874 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotnitzky, A., Robins, J.M.: Semiparametric regression estimation in the presence of dependent censoring. Biometrika 82, 805–820 (1995)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B., Thomas, N.: Characterizing the effect of matching using linear propensity score methods with normal distribution. Biometrika 79, 797–809 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B., Thomas, N.: Combining propensity score matching with additional adjustments for prognostic covariates. J Am Statist Assoc 95, 573–585 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M.: Identifying the Environmental Causes of Disease: How Do We Decide What to Believe and When to Take Action? London: Academy of Medical Sciences (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., Campbell, D. T.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D.: The renaissance of field experimentation in evaluating interventions. Annu Rev Psychol 60, 607–629 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, B.E., Gilbert, P.B., Mehrotra, D.V.: Eliciting a counterfactual sensitivity parameter. Am Statistician 61, 56–63 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Silber, J.H., Rosenbaum, P. R., Trudeau, M.E., Chen, W., Zhang, X., Lorch, S.L., Rapaport-Kelz, R., Mosher, R.E., Even-Shoshan, O. : Preoperative antibiotics and mortality in the elderly. Ann Surg 242, 107–114 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, D., Rosenbaum, P.R.: War and wages: The strength of instrumental variables and their sensitivity to unobserved biases. J Am Statist Assoc 103, 924–933 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Spielman, R.S., Ewens, W.J.: A sibship test for linkage in the presence of association: The sib transmission/disequilibrium test. Am J Hum Genet 62, 450–458 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolley, P.D.: When genius errs –- R.A. Fisher and the lung cancer controversy. Am J Epidemiol 133, 416–425 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, R.: The assumptions on which causal inferences rest. J Roy Statist Soc B 55, 455–466 (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Trochim, W.M.K.: Pattern matching, validity and conceptualization in program evaluation. Eval Rev 9, 575–604 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenbroucke, J.P.: When are observational studies as credible as randomized trials? Lancet 363, 1728–1731 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanderWeele, T.: The use of propensity score methods in psychiatric research. Int J Methods Psychol Res 15, 95–103 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volpp, K.G., Rosen, A.K., Rosenbaum, P.R., Romano, P.S., Even-Shoshan, O., Wang, Y., Bellini, L., Behringer, T., Silber, J.H.: Mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries in the first 2 years following ACGME resident duty hour reform. J Am Med Assoc 8, 975–983 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L.S., Krieger, A.M.: Causal conclusions are most sensitive to unobserved binary covariates. Statist Med 25, 2257–2271 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, N.S.: Can the “specificity” of an association be rehabilitated as a basis for supporting a causal hypothesis? Epidemiology 13, 6–8 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werfel, U., Langen, V., Eickhoff, I., Schoonbrood, J., Vahrenholz, C., Brauksiepe, A., Popp, W., Norpoth, K.: Elevated DNA single-strand breakage frequencies in lymphocytes of welders. Carcinogenesis 19, 413–418 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wintemute, G.J., Wright, M.A., Drake, C.M., Beaumont, J.J.: Subsequent criminal activity among violent misdemeanants who seek to purchase handguns: risk factors and effectiveness of denying handgun purchase. J Am Med Assoc 285, 1019–1026 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, B.B., Gastwirth, J.L.: Sensitivity analysis for trend tests: Application to the risk of radiation exposure. Biostatistics 6, 201–209 (2005)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zanutto, E., Lu, B., Hornik, R.: Using propensity score subclassification for multiple treatment doses to evaluate a national antidrug media campaign. J Educ Behav Statist 30, 59–73 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Statistics Department Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 19104-6340, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Paul R. Rosenbaum

Authors
  1. Paul R. Rosenbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul R. Rosenbaum .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rosenbaum, P.R. (2010). Two Simple Models for Observational Studies. In: Design of Observational Studies. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1213-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation