So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Phân tích độ nhạy không gian cho tính nhân quả× | Ghép cặp điểm xu hướng× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực≠ | Suy luận nhân quả | Thống kê nghiên cứu |
| Họ≠ | Regression model | Process / pipeline |
| Năm ra đời≠ | 1988–2021 (developed progressively) | 1983 |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Anselin (1988) for spatial diagnostics; Reich et al. (2021) for spatial causal frameworks | Paul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin |
| Loại≠ | Sensitivity / robustness analysis | Method |
| Công trình gốc≠ | Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. ISBN: 978-9024737322 | 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 ↗ |
| Tên gọi khác≠ | spatial causal sensitivity, spatial robustness checks, SSAC, spatial confounding sensitivity | PSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance |
| Liên quan≠ | 6 | 3 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | Spatial sensitivity analysis for causality systematically tests whether a causal estimate derived from georeferenced data holds up as spatial structure, spillovers, and the choice of spatial weights matrix are varied. Because nearby units often share unmeasured confounders — soil quality, local infrastructure, neighbourhood norms — a naive regression may yield biased causal estimates. This method reveals how fragile or robust a claimed causal effect is to alternative spatial specifications. | 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. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|