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。

隠れたバイアスに対する感度分析(ローゼンバウム限界値 / E値)×因果推論におけるプラセボテスト×
分野因果推論因果推論
系統Regression modelRegression model
提唱年20022010
提唱者Paul R. Rosenbaum (bounds); Tyler J. VanderWeele & Peng Ding (E-value)Abadie, Diamond & Hainmueller (synthetic control placebos); Imbens & Lemieux (RDD validity)
種類Sensitivity analysis for causal inferenceFalsification / robustness test family for causal inference
原典Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679Abadie, A., Diamond, A., & Hainmueller, J. (2010). Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California's Tobacco Control Program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490), 493-505. DOI ↗
別名Rosenbaum bounds, E-value, hidden bias sensitivity analysis, unmeasured confounding sensitivityfalsification tests, placebo checks, refutation tests, Plasebo Testleri — Nedensel Çıkarım Doğrulama
関連55
概要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).Placebo tests are a family of falsification checks that probe the credibility of a causal claim by re-running the analysis on a fake treatment, a false intervention date, or an outcome that should not have been affected. The approach was popularised through the synthetic control work of Abadie, Diamond and Hainmueller (2010) and the regression-discontinuity validity checks of Imbens and Lemieux (2008).
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding · Placebo Tests. 2026-06-18に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare