Abstract
Propensity score (PS) matching is widely used for studying treatment effects in observational studies. This article proposes the method of matching weights (MWs) as an analog to one-to-one pair matching without replacement on the PS with a caliper. Compared with pair matching, the proposed method offers more efficient estimation, more accurate variance calculation, better balance, and simpler asymptotic analysis. A statistical test for the misspecification of the PS model is proposed for balance checking purposes. An augmented version of the MW estimator is developed that has the double robust property, that is, the estimator is consistent, if either the outcome model or the PS model is correct. The proposed method is studied in simulations and illustrated through a real data example.
-
1.
Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41–55.
-
2.
D’Agostino RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 1998;17:2265–81.
-
3.
Imbens GW. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Rev Econ Stat 2004;86:4–29.
-
4.
Ho DE, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA. Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Pol Anal 2007;15:199–236.
-
5.
Guo S, Fraser M. Propensity score analysis: statistical methods and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications, Inc. 2010.
-
6.
Rubin DB. Which ifs have causal answers? J Am Stat Assoc 1986;81:961–2.
-
7.
Imbens GW, Wooldridge JM. Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. J Econ Lit 2009;47:5–86.
-
8.
Stuart E. Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Sci 2010;25:1–21.
-
9.
Luo Z, Gardiner JC, Bradley CJ. Applying propensity score methods in medical research: pitfalls and prospects. Med Care Res Rev 2010;67:528–54.
-
10.
Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc 1984;79:516–24.
-
11.
Lunceford JK, Davidian M. Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study. Stat Med 2004;23:2937–60.
-
12.
Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. Constructing a control-group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat 1985;39:33–8.
-
13.
Austin PC. A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003. Stat Med 2008;27:2037–49.
-
14.
Hirano K, Imbens GW. Estimation of causal effects using propensity score weighting: an application to data on right heart catheterization. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2001;2:259–78.
-
15.
Freedman DA, Berk RA. Weighting regressions by propensity scores. Eval Rev 2008;32:392–409.
-
16.
Austin PC. Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and monte carlo simulations. Biometrical J 2009;51:171–84.
-
17.
Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 2009;28:3083–107.
-
18.
Imai K, King G, Stuart EA. Misunderstandings among experimentalists and observationalists in causal inference. J R Stat Soc Ser A 2008;171:481–502.
-
19.
Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharm Stat 2010;10:150–61.
-
20.
Hill J. Discussion of research using propensity-score matching: comments on “a critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003” by peter Austin. Stat Med 2008;27:2055–61.
-
21.
Stuart E. Developing practical recommendations for the use of propensity scores: discussion of “a critical appraisal of propensity score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003” by peter Austin. Stat Med 2008;27:2062–5.
-
22.
Hansen BB. The essential role of balance tests in propensity-matched observational studies: Comments on “a critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003” by peter Austin. Stat Med 2008;27:2050–4.
-
23.
Abadie A, Imbens GW. On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. Mimeo, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2005.
-
24.
Abadie A, Imbens GW. Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica 2006;74:235–67.
-
25.
Abadie A, Imbens GW. Matching on the estimated propensity score. NBER Working Paper Series, w15301, 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1463894.
-
26.
Robins JM, Sued M, Lei-Gomez Q, Rotnitzky A. Comment: performance of double-robust estimators when “inverse probability” weights are highly variable. Stat Sci 2007;22:544–59.
-
27.
Bang H, Robins JM. Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models. Biometrics 2005;61:962–72.
-
28.
van der Laan MJ, Robins JM. Unified methods for censored longitudinal data and causality. New York: Springer, 2003.
-
29.
Robins JM, Hernan MA, Brumback B. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology 2000;11:550–60.
-
30.
Friedman JH, Silverman BW. Flexible parsimonious smoothing and additive modeling. Technometrics 1989;31:3–21.
-
31.
Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:757–63.
-
32.
Li L, Wang WW, Chan ISF. Correlation coefficient inference on censored bioassay data. J Biopharm Stat 2005;15:501–12.
-
33.
Senn S. Testing for baseline balance in clinical trials. Stat Med 1994;13:1715–26.
-
34.
Hansen BB, Bowers J. Covariate balance in simple, stratified and clustered comparative studies. Stat Sci 2008;23:219–36.
-
35.
Shaikh AM, Simonsen M, Vytlacil EJ, Yildiz N. A specification test for the propensity score using its distribution conditional on participation. J Econometrics 2009;1:33–46.
-
36.
Lee WS. Propensity score matching and variations on the balancing test. Empirical Econ 2013;44(1):47–80.
-
37.
Austin PC. Type i error rates, coverage of confidence intervals, and variance estimation in propensity-score matched analyses. Int J Biostat 2009;5:1–21.
-
38.
Robins JM, Wang N. Inference for imputation estimators. Biometrika 2000;87:113–24.
-
39.
Kang JDY, Schafer JL. Demystifying double robustness: a comparison of alternative strategies for estimating a population mean from incomplete data (with discussions and rejoinder). Stat Sci 2007;22:523–39.
-
40.
Rosenbaum PR. Model-based direct adjustment. J Am Stat Assoc 1987;82:387–94.
-
41.
Cao WH, Tsiatis AA, Davidian M. Improving efficiency and robustness of the doubly robust estimator for a population mean with incomplete data. Biometrika 2009;96:723–34.
-
42.
Crump RK, Hotz VJ, Imbens GW, Mitnik OA. Dealing with limited overlap in estimation of average treatment effects. Biometrika 2009;96:187–99.
-
43.
Tan ZQ. Bounded, efficient and doubly robust estimation with inverse weighting. Biometrika 2010;97:661–82.
-
44.
Tsiatis AA. Semiparametric theory and missing data. New York: Springer, 2006.
©2013 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin / Boston.
Journal + Issues
IJB publishes biostatistical models and methods, statistical theory, as well as original applications of statistical methods, for important practical problems arising from various sciences. It covers the entire range of biostatistics, from theoretical advances to relevant and sensible translations of a practical problem into a statistical framework, including advances in biostatistical computing.