Evidence factors in observational studies
AbstractSome experiments involve more than one random assignment of treatments to units. An analogous situation arises in certain observational studies, although randomization is not used, so each assignment may be biased. If each assignment is suspect, it is natural to ask whether there are separate pieces of information, dependent upon different assumptions, and perhaps whether conclusions about treatment effects are not critically dependent upon one or another suspect assumption. The design of an observational study contains evidence factors if it permits several statistically independent tests of the same null hypothesis about treatment effects, where these tests rely on different assumptions about treatment assignments at several levels of assignment. Two designs and two empirical examples are considered, one example of each design. In the dose-control design, there are matched pairs of a treated subject and an untreated control, and doses of treatment vary between pairs for treated subjects; this yields two evidence factors. In the varied intensity design, there are matched sets with two treated subjects and one or more untreated controls, where the two treated subjects within the same matched set receive different doses of treatment, and in a technically different way, the design yields two evidence factors. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Biometrika Trust in its journal Biometrika.
Volume (Year): 97 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://biomet.oxfordjournals.org/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Harrison, Ann E. & Lin, Justin Yifu & Xu, L. Colin, 2013.
"Explaining Africa's (Dis)advantage,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
6316, The World Bank.
- Cull, Robert & Xu, Lixin Colin & Yang, Xi & Zhou, Li-An & Zhu, Tian, 2013. "Market facilitation by local government and firm efficiency : evidence from China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6688, The World Bank.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.