ScholarGate
Assistant

Comparer des méthodes

Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.

Évaluation d'impact contrefactuelle des effets hétérogènes du traitement×Appariement par score de propension×
DomaineInférence causaleStatistiques de recherche
FamilleRegression modelProcess / pipeline
Année d'origine2010s1983
Auteur d'origineCerulli (2010) for CIE framework; Athey & Wager (2019) for causal forest-based CATE within CIEPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
TypeQuasi-experimental causal inference with subgroup heterogeneityMethod
Source fondatriceCerulli, G. (2010). Modelling and measuring the effect of public subsidies on business R&D: A critical review of the econometric literature. Economic Record, 86(274), 421-449. DOI ↗Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. DOI ↗
AliasHTE-CIE, heterogeneous CIE, CATE-based counterfactual evaluation, subgroup counterfactual impact evaluationPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
Apparentées43
RésuméHeterogeneous Treatment Effect Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (HTE-CIE) extends standard counterfactual impact evaluation by estimating how the causal effect of a policy or intervention varies across subgroups defined by pre-treatment characteristics. Rather than reporting a single average treatment effect, it maps the Conditional Average Treatment Effect (CATE) across the covariate space, revealing who benefits most or least from an intervention.Propensity score matching (PSM) is a method for reducing confounding bias in observational studies by balancing baseline characteristics between treatment groups, simulating randomization. Developed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983), it estimates the probability of receiving treatment given observed covariates, then matches or weights treated and control individuals with similar treatment probabilities. Widely used in medicine, epidemiology, and policy evaluation when randomized trials are infeasible or unethical, enabling estimation of treatment effects while controlling for selection bias.
ScholarGateJeu de données
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED

Aller à la recherche Télécharger les diapositives

ScholarGateComparer des méthodes: Heterogeneous treatment effect Counterfactual impact evaluation · Propensity Score Matching. Consulté le 2026-06-20 sur https://scholargate.app/fr/compare