ScholarGate
دستیار

مقایسهٔ روش‌ها

روش‌های انتخابی خود را کنار هم مرور کنید؛ ردیف‌های متفاوت برجسته شده‌اند.

روش‌های تطبیق (CEM / بهینه / ژنتیک)×تحلیل حساسیت برای سوگیری پنهان (کران‌های روزنباوم / مقدار E)×
حوزهاستنتاج علّیاستنتاج علّی
خانوادهRegression modelRegression model
سال پیدایش20122002
پدیدآورIacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching)Paul R. Rosenbaum (bounds); Tyler J. VanderWeele & Peng Ding (E-value)
نوعMatching for causal inferenceSensitivity analysis for causal inference
منبع بنیادینIacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679
نام‌های دیگرcoarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEMRosenbaum bounds, E-value, hidden bias sensitivity analysis, unmeasured confounding sensitivity
مرتبط55
خلاصهMatching Methods are a family of causal-inference techniques beyond propensity-score matching that pair treated and control units with similar covariates so that a treatment effect can be read off the balanced sample. The family includes Coarsened Exact Matching (Iacus, King & Porro, 2012), optimal matching, and genetic matching.Sensitivity analysis for hidden bias is a family of methods that quantify how strongly an unmeasured confounder would have to operate before it could overturn a causal conclusion drawn from observational data. It was crystallised by Paul Rosenbaum's sensitivity bounds (2002) and extended by VanderWeele and Ding's E-value (2017).
ScholarGateمجموعه‌داده
  1. v1
  2. 2 منابع
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 منابع
  3. PUBLISHED

رفتن به جست‌وجو دریافت اسلایدها

ScholarGateمقایسهٔ روش‌ها: Matching Methods · Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding. بازیابی‌شده در 2026-06-15 از https://scholargate.app/fa/compare