IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v184y2021i4p1390-1413.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Propensity score analysis for a semi‐continuous exposure variable: a study of gestational alcohol exposure and childhood cognition

Author

Listed:
  • Tugba Akkaya Hocagil
  • Richard J. Cook
  • Sandra W. Jacobson
  • Joseph L. Jacobson
  • Louise M. Ryan

Abstract

Propensity score methodology has become increasingly popular in recent years as a tool for estimating causal effects in observational studies. Much of the related research has been directed at settings with binary or discrete exposure variables with more recent work involving continuous exposure variables. In environmental epidemiology, a substantial proportion of individuals is often completely unexposed while others may experience heavy exposure leading to an exposure distribution with a point mass at zero and a heavy right tail. We suggest a new approach to handle this type of exposure data by constructing a propensity score based on a two‐part model and show how this model can be used to more reliably adjust for covariates of a semi‐continuous exposure variable. We also consider the case when a misspecified propensity score is used in a regression adjustment and derive an explicit form of the bias. We show that the potential bias gets smaller as the estimated propensity score gets closer to the true expectation of the exposure variable given a set of observed covariates. While this result pertains to a more general setting, we use it to evaluate the potential bias in settings in which the true exposure has a semi‐continuous structure. We also evaluate and compare the performance of our proposed method through simulation studies relative to a simpler linear regression‐based propensity score for a continuous exposure variable as well as through direct covariate adjustment. Overall, we find that using a propensity score constructed via a two‐part model significantly improves the regression estimate when the exposure variable is semi‐continuous in nature. Specifically when the proportion of non‐exposed subjects is high and the effects of covariates on exposure and outcome are strong, the proposed two‐part propensity score method outperforms the more standard competing methods. We illustrate our method using data from the Detroit Longitudinal Cohort Study in which the exposure variable reflects gestational alcohol exposure featuring zero values and a long tail.

Suggested Citation

  • Tugba Akkaya Hocagil & Richard J. Cook & Sandra W. Jacobson & Joseph L. Jacobson & Louise M. Ryan, 2021. "Propensity score analysis for a semi‐continuous exposure variable: a study of gestational alcohol exposure and childhood cognition," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(4), pages 1390-1413, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:184:y:2021:i:4:p:1390-1413
    DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12716
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssa.12716?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haitao Chai & Hongmei Jiang & Lu Lin & Lei Liu, 2018. "A marginalized two-part Beta regression model for microbiome compositional data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Carolyn Madden & Bret Mackay & Susan Skillman & Marcia Ciol & Paula Diehr, 2000. "Risk adjusting capitation: Applications in employed and disabled populations," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 101-109, February.
    3. Michela Bia & Alessandra Mattei, 2008. "A Stata package for the estimation of the dose–response function through adjustment for the generalized propensity score," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(3), pages 354-373, September.
    4. White, Halbert, 1982. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Kosuke Imai & David A. van Dyk, 2004. "Causal Inference With General Treatment Regimes: Generalizing the Propensity Score," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 854-866, January.
    6. Fichera, Eleonora & Emsley, Richard & Sutton, Matt, 2016. "Is treatment “intensity” associated with healthier lifestyle choices? An application of the dose response function," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 149-163.
    7. Guido W. Imbens, 1999. "The Role of the Propensity Score in Estimating Dose-Response Functions," NBER Technical Working Papers 0237, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Duan, Naihua, et al, 1983. "A Comparison of Alternative Models for the Demand for Medical Care," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 1(2), pages 115-126, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dickson N. Khainga & Paswel P. Marenya & Maria Luz Quinhentos, 2021. "How much is enough? How multi-season exposure to demonstrations affects the use of conservation farming practices in Mozambique," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 11067-11089, July.
    2. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & Iván Díaz & David Harrison, 2015. "Evaluation of the Effect of a Continuous Treatment: A Machine Learning Approach with an Application to Treatment for Traumatic Brain Injury," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1213-1228, September.
    3. Pablo Ibarraran & Miguel Sarzosa & Yuri Suarez Dillon Soares, 2008. "The Welfare Impacts of Local Investment Projects: Evidence from the Guatemala FIS," OVE Working Papers 0208, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
    4. Jerzy Michalek & Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs, 2014. "Capitalization of the Single Payment Scheme into Land Value: Generalized Propensity Score Evidence from the European Union," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(2), pages 260-289.
    5. Hilal Atasoy & Rajiv D. Banker & Paul A. Pavlou, 2016. "On the Longitudinal Effects of IT Use on Firm-Level Employment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 6-26, March.
    6. Ida D'Attoma & Silvia Pacei, 2018. "Evaluating the Effects of Product Innovation on the Performance of European Firms by Using the Generalised Propensity Score," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 19(1), pages 94-112, February.
    7. Michela Bia & Carlos A. Flores & Alfonso Flores-Lagunes & Alessandra Mattei, 2014. "A Stata package for the application of semiparametric estimators of dose–response functions," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 14(3), pages 580-604, September.
    8. Flores, Carlos A. & Mitnik, Oscar A., 2009. "Evaluating Nonexperimental Estimators for Multiple Treatments: Evidence from Experimental Data," IZA Discussion Papers 4451, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Lechner, Michael & Smith, Jeffrey, 2007. "What is the value added by caseworkers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 135-151, April.
    10. Jie Zhu & Blanca Gallego, 2021. "Continuous Treatment Recommendation with Deep Survival Dose Response Function," Papers 2108.10453, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    11. Tübbicke Stefan, 2022. "Entropy Balancing for Continuous Treatments," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 71-89, January.
    12. Keswell, Malcolm & Carter, Michael R., 2014. "Poverty and land redistribution," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 250-261.
    13. Magrini, Emiliano & Montalbano, Pierluigi & Nenci, Silvia & Salvatici, Luca, 2014. "Agricultural trade distortions during recent international price spikes: what implications for food security?," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182726, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Haji, Jema, 2022. "Impact of agricultural commercialization on child nutrition in Ethiopia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    15. Juan M. Villa, 2014. "The length of exposure to antipoverty transfer programmes: what is the relevance for children's human capital formation?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 20614, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    16. Tamru, Seneshaw & Minten, Bart, 2018. "Investing in wet mills and washed coffee in Ethiopia: Benefits and constraints," ESSP working papers 121, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Emiliano Magrini & Pierluigi Montalbano & Silvia Nenci & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "Agricultural (Dis)Incentives and Food Security: Is There a Link?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(4), pages 847-871.
    18. BIA Michela & FLORES Carlos A. & MATTEI Alessandra, 2011. "Nonparametric Estimators of Dose-Response Functions," LISER Working Paper Series 2011-40, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    19. Birthal, Pratap Singh & Roy, Devesh & Negi, Digvijay S., 2015. "Agricultural diversification and poverty in India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1446, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Ruth T. Chepchirchir & Ibrahim Macharia & Alice W. Murage & Charles A. O. Midega & Zeyaur R. Khan, 2017. "Impact assessment of push-pull pest management on incomes, productivity and poverty among smallholder households in Eastern Uganda," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1359-1372, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:184:y:2021:i:4:p:1390-1413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.