IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssb/v84y2022i5p1726-1750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An approximation algorithm for blocking of an experimental design

Author

Listed:
  • Bikram Karmakar

Abstract

Blocked randomized designs are used to improve the precision of treatment effect estimates compared to a completely randomized design. A block is a set of units that are relatively homogeneous and consequently would tend to produce relatively similar outcomes if the treatment had no effect. The problem of finding the optimal blocking of the units into equal sized blocks of any given size larger than two is known to be a difficult problem—there is no polynomial time method guaranteed to find the optimal blocking. All available methods to solve the problem are heuristic methods. We propose methods that run in polynomial time and guarantee a blocking that is provably close to the optimal blocking. In all our simulation studies, the proposed methods perform better, create better homogeneous blocks, compared with the existing methods. Our blocking method aims to minimize the maximum of all pairwise differences of units in the same block. We show that bounding this maximum difference ensures that the error in the average treatment effect estimate is similarly bounded for all treatment assignments. In contrast, if the blocking bounds the average or sum of these differences, the error in the average treatment effect estimate can still be large in several treatment assignments.

Suggested Citation

  • Bikram Karmakar, 2022. "An approximation algorithm for blocking of an experimental design," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(5), pages 1726-1750, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssb:v:84:y:2022:i:5:p:1726-1750
    DOI: 10.1111/rssb.12545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssb.12545
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssb.12545?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. Lu, Bo & Greevy, Robert & Xu, Xinyi & Beck, Cole, 2011. "Optimal Nonbipartite Matching and Its Statistical Applications," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 65(1), pages 21-30.
    2. José R. Zubizarreta & Luke Keele, 2017. "Optimal Multilevel Matching in Clustered Observational Studies: A Case Study of the Effectiveness of Private Schools Under a Large-Scale Voucher System," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 547-560, April.
    3. Dan Yang & Dylan S. Small & Jeffrey H. Silber & Paul R. Rosenbaum, 2012. "Optimal Matching with Minimal Deviation from Fine Balance in a Study of Obesity and Surgical Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 628-636, June.
    4. Rosenbaum, Paul R., 2010. "Design Sensitivity and Efficiency in Observational Studies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(490), pages 692-702.
    5. Samuel D. Pimentel & Rachel R. Kelz & Jeffrey H. Silber & Paul R. Rosenbaum, 2015. "Large, Sparse Optimal Matching With Refined Covariate Balance in an Observational Study of the Health Outcomes Produced by New Surgeons," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(510), pages 515-527, June.
    6. Ellickson, P.L. & McCaffrey, D.F. & Ghosh-Dastidar, B. & Longshore, D.L., 2003. "New Inroads in Preventing Adolescent Drug Use: Results from a Large-Scale Trial of Project ALERT in Middle Schools," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(11), pages 1830-1836.
    7. Moore, Ryan T., 2012. "Multivariate Continuous Blocking to Improve Political Science Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 460-479.
    8. Colin B. Fogarty, 2018. "On mitigating the analytical limitations of finely stratified experiments," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(5), pages 1035-1056, November.
    9. José R. Zubizarreta, 2012. "Using Mixed Integer Programming for Matching in an Observational Study of Kidney Failure After Surgery," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(500), pages 1360-1371, December.
    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. Bo Zhang & Dylan S. Small, 2020. "A calibrated sensitivity analysis for matched observational studies with application to the effect of second‐hand smoke exposure on blood lead levels in children," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1285-1305, November.
    2. Ruoqi Yu, 2021. "Evaluating and improving a matched comparison of antidepressants and bone density," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(4), pages 1276-1288, December.
    3. Jason J. Sauppe & Sheldon H. Jacobson & Edward C. Sewell, 2014. "Complexity and Approximation Results for the Balance Optimization Subset Selection Model for Causal Inference in Observational Studies," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 547-566, August.
    4. Samuel D. Pimentel & Lauren Vollmer Forrow & Jonathan Gellar & Jiaqi Li, 2020. "Optimal matching approaches in health policy evaluations under rolling enrolment," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1411-1435, October.
    5. Ruoqi Yu, 2023. "How well can fine balance work for covariate balancing," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2346-2356, September.
    6. Jason J. Sauppe & Sheldon H. Jacobson, 2017. "The role of covariate balance in observational studies," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 323-344, June.
    7. Siyu Heng & Hyunseung Kang & Dylan S. Small & Colin B. Fogarty, 2021. "Increasing power for observational studies of aberrant response: An adaptive approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(3), pages 482-504, July.
    8. Luke Keele & Steve Harris & Samuel D. Pimentel & Richard Grieve, 2020. "Stronger instruments and refined covariate balance in an observational study of the effectiveness of prompt admission to intensive care units," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1501-1521, October.
    9. María de los Angeles Resa & José R. Zubizarreta, 2020. "Direct and stable weight adjustment in non‐experimental studies with multivalued treatments: analysis of the effect of an earthquake on post‐traumatic stress," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1387-1410, October.
    10. Bo Zhang, 2023. "Efficient algorithms for building representative matched pairs with enhanced generalizability," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3981-3997, December.
    11. Hochbaum, Dorit S. & Rao, Xu & Sauppe, Jason, 2022. "Network flow methods for the minimum covariate imbalance problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 827-836.
    12. Md Saiful Islam & Md Sarowar Morshed & Gary J Young & Md Noor-E-Alam, 2019. "Robust policy evaluation from large-scale observational studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Bo Zhang & Siyu Heng & Emily J. MacKay & Ting Ye, 2022. "Bridging preference‐based instrumental variable studies and cluster‐randomized encouragement experiments: Study design, noncompliance, and average cluster effect ratio," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1639-1650, December.
    14. Tian Heong Chan & Francis de Véricourt & Omar Besbes, 2019. "Contracting in Medical Equipment Maintenance Services: An Empirical Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1136-1150, March.
    15. Zhao, Anqi & Ding, Peng, 2021. "Covariate-adjusted Fisher randomization tests for the average treatment effect," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 278-294.
    16. Samuel D. Pimentel & Dylan S. Small & Paul R. Rosenbaum, 2016. "Constructed Second Control Groups and Attenuation of Unmeasured Biases," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(515), pages 1157-1167, July.
    17. Rüdiger Mutz & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2012. "The generalized propensity score methodology for estimating unbiased journal impact factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 377-390, August.
    18. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    19. Harrison, Ann E. & Lin, Justin Yifu & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2014. "Explaining Africa’s (Dis)advantage," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 59-77.
    20. Aufenanger, Tobias, 2017. "Machine learning to improve experimental design," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 16/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics, revised 2017.

    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:jorssb:v:84:y:2022:i:5:p:1726-1750. 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.