Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Matchingmethoden (CEM / Optimaal / Genetisch)× | Gevoeligheidsanalyse voor verborgen bias (Rosenbaum-grenzen / E-waarde)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Causale inferentie | Causale inferentie |
| Familie | Regression model | Regression model |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 2012 | 2002 |
| Grondlegger≠ | Iacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching) | Paul R. Rosenbaum (bounds); Tyler J. VanderWeele & Peng Ding (E-value) |
| Type≠ | Matching for causal inference | Sensitivity analysis for causal inference |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | 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. (2002). Observational Studies (2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-0387989679 |
| Aliassen | coarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEM | Rosenbaum bounds, E-value, hidden bias sensitivity analysis, unmeasured confounding sensitivity |
| Verwant | 5 | 5 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Matching 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). |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|