Propensity Score Analysis: Recent Debate and Discussion

被引:75
|
作者
Guo, Shenyang [1 ,2 ]
Fraser, Mark [3 ]
Chen, Qi [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Sociol, Xian, Peoples R China
[2] Washington Univ, Brown Sch Social Work, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Sch Social Work, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
关键词
endogeneity; observational studies; propensity score analysis; propensity score matching; selection bias; MATCHING ESTIMATORS; ADJUSTMENT; REGRESSION; BIAS;
D O I
10.1086/711393
中图分类号
C916 [社会工作、社会管理、社会规划];
学科分类号
1204 ;
摘要
Propensity score analysis is often used to address selection bias in program evaluation with observational data. However, a recent study suggested that propensity score matching may accomplish the opposite of its intended goal-increasing imbalance, inefficiency, model dependence, and bias. We assess common propensity score models and offer our responses to these criticisms. We used Monte Carlo methods to simulate two alternative settings of data creation-selection on observed variables versus selection on unobserved variables-and compared eight propensity score models on bias reduction and sample-size retention. Based on the simulations, no single propensity score method reduced bias across all scenarios. Optimal results depend on the fit between assumptions embedded in the analytic model and the process of data generation. Methodologic knowledge of model assumptions and substantive knowledge of causal mechanisms, including sources of selection bias, should inform the choice of analytic strategies involving propensity scores.
引用
收藏
页码:463 / 482
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条