ScholarGate
アシスタント

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。

CEMによる政策評価×傾向スコアマッチング×
分野因果推論研究統計
系統Regression modelProcess / pipeline
提唱年2011-20121983
提唱者Iacus, King & PorroPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
種類Matching / quasi-experimental designMethod
原典Iacus, 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., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. DOI ↗
別名CEM, Coarsened Exact Matching, CEM policy evaluation, coarsening-based matchingPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
関連53
概要Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) is a quasi-experimental causal-inference technique that creates balanced treatment and control groups from observational data by temporarily coarsening covariates into bins, exactly matching units within those bins, and then pruning unmatched observations before estimating policy effects. Introduced by Iacus, King, and Porro, CEM belongs to the monotonic imbalance bounding family of matching methods and is especially popular in policy evaluation.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.
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Policy Evaluation Coarsened Exact Matching · Propensity Score Matching. 2026-06-19に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare