手法を比較
選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。
| 反実仮想による影響評価(CIE)× | 因果推論のための操作変数(IV)法× | |
|---|---|---|
| 分野≠ | 因果推論 | 医療経済学 |
| 系統≠ | Regression model | Process / pipeline |
| 提唱年≠ | 1970s–2000s | 1990s (modern applications) |
| 提唱者≠ | Heckman, Imbens, Rubin, and the program evaluation literature | Angrist & Pischke (applied econometrics); rooted in econometric theory |
| 種類≠ | Causal inference / program evaluation | Method |
| 原典≠ | Heckman, J. J., & Vytlacil, E. J. (2007). Econometric evaluation of social programs, Part I: Causal models, structural models and econometric policy evaluation. Handbook of Econometrics, 6B, 4779-4874. DOI ↗ | Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J. S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press. link ↗ |
| 別名 | CIE, counterfactual evaluation, counterfactual policy evaluation, impact evaluation | IV, two-stage least squares, TSLS, causal estimation |
| 関連≠ | 5 | 3 |
| 概要≠ | Counterfactual Impact Evaluation is a family of causal methods that estimates the effect of an intervention by comparing what actually happened to participants with what would have happened had the intervention not taken place. Formalised in the Rubin Causal Model and extended by Heckman, Imbens and others, CIE underlies most modern program and policy evaluation practice. | Instrumental variables (IV) is an econometric method to estimate causal effects when treatment or exposure is not randomly assigned and confounding is severe or unmeasured. IV relies on a third variable (instrument) that influences treatment but does not directly affect the outcome, allowing researchers to isolate the causal effect from the noise of confounding. Developed extensively in econometrics (Angrist & Pischke, 1990s–2000s), IV methods are increasingly used in health economics and health services research to leverage natural experiments and policy changes. |
| ScholarGateデータセット ↗ |
|
|