Abstract
A counterclaim disputes the claim that an association between treatment received and outcome exhibited reflects an effect caused by the treatment. Some counterclaims undermine themselves. A supplemental statistical analysis may demonstrate this.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Because the US Fatality Analysis Reporting System only records information about crashes with at least one fatality, it has certain limitations —certain “problems of ascertainment” [4] —that affect the types of inferences that may be drawn. These limitations do not affect tests of the hypothesis of no treatment effect, as developed in this chapter, but they would have consequences for estimates of the magnitude of effect that are not discussed here [10].
- 3.
This notation is slightly but not consequentially different from [10].
Bibliography
Austin, J.L.: Philosophical Papers. Oxford, New York (1979)
Bross, I.D.J.: Statistical criticism. Cancer 13, 394–400 (1961). Reprinted with Discussion in Obs. Stud. 4, 1–70 (2018)
Evans, L.: The effectiveness of safety belts in preventing fatalities. Accid. Anal. Prev. 18, 229–241 (1986)
Fisher, R.A.: The effect of methods of ascertainment upon the estimation of frequencies. Ann. Eugen. 6, 13–25 (1934)
Hill, A.B. : The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proc. R. Soc. Med. 58, 295–300 (1965)
Imai, K., Keele, L., Yamamoto, T: Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Stat. Sci. 25, 51–71 (2010)
Rindskopf, D.: Plausible rival hypotheses in measurement design. In: Bickman, L. (ed.) Research Design: Donald Campbell’s Legacy, Vol. 2, pp. 1–12. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (2000)
Rozelle, R.M., Campbell, D.T.: More plausible rival hypotheses in the cross-lagged panel correlation technique. Psych. Bull. 71, 74–80 (1969)
Rosenbaum, P.R.: The consequences of adjustment for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 147, 656–666 (1984)
Rosenbaum, P.R.: Some counterclaims undermine themselves in observational studies. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 110, 1389–1398 (2015)
Rosenbaum, P.R., Small, D.S.: Beyond statistical criticism. Obs. Stud. 4, 63–70 (2018)
Weed, D.L., Hursting, S.D.: Biologic plausibility in causal inference: current method and practice. Am. J. Epidemiol. 147, 415–425 (1998)
Weiss, N.: Can the ‘specificity’ of an association be rehabilitated as a basis for supporting a causal hypothesis? Epidemiol 13, 6–8 (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
R. Rosenbaum, P. (2020). Some Counterclaims Undermine Themselves. In: Design of Observational Studies. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46405-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46405-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46404-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-46405-9
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)