IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Empirical likelihood calibration estimation for the median treatment difference in observational studies

Listed author(s):
  • Wang, Qihua
  • Lai, Peng
Registered author(s):

    The estimation of average (or mean) treatment effects is one of the most popular methods in the statistical literature. If one can have observations directly from treatment and control groups, then the simple t-statistic can be used if the underlying distributions are close to normal distributions. On the other hand, if the underlying distributions are skewed, then the median difference or the Wilcoxon statistic is preferable. In observational studies, however, each individual's choice of treatment is not completely at random. It may depend on the baseline covariates. In order to find an unbiased estimation, one has to adjust the choice probability function or the propensity score function. In this paper, we study the median treatment effect. The empirical likelihood method is used to calibrate baseline covariate information effectively. An economic dataset is used for illustration.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.

    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Computational Statistics & Data Analysis.

    Volume (Year): 55 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 4 (April)
    Pages: 1596-1609

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:1596-1609
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Sergio Firpo, 2007. "Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Quantile Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 259-276, 01.
    2. Huang, Chiung-Yu & Qin, Jing & Follmann, Dean A, 2008. "Empirical Likelihood-Based Estimation of the Treatment Effect in a Pretest–Posttest Study," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(483), pages 1270-1280.
    3. Jing Qin & Biao Zhang, 2007. "Empirical-likelihood-based inference in missing response problems and its application in observational studies," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(1), pages 101-122.
    4. Changbao Wu, 2003. "Optimal calibration estimators in survey sampling," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 90(4), pages 937-951, December.
    5. Qin, Jing & Shao, Jun & Zhang, Biao, 2008. "Efficient and Doubly Robust Imputation for Covariate-Dependent Missing Responses," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 797-810, June.
    6. Alberto Abadie & David Drukker & Jane Leber Herr & Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(3), pages 290-311, September.
    7. Qihua Wang, 2002. "Empirical likelihood-based inference in linear errors-in-covariables models with validation data," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 89(2), pages 345-358, June.
    8. Hua Liang & Suojin Wang & Raymond J. Carroll, 2007. "Partially linear models with missing response variables and error-prone covariates," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 94(1), pages 185-198.
    9. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    10. Jinyong Hahn, 1998. "On the Role of the Propensity Score in Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 315-332, March.
    11. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-620, September.
    12. Stute, Winfried & Xue, Liugen & Zhu, Lixing, 2007. "Empirical Likelihood Inference in Nonlinear Errors-in-Covariables Models With Validation Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 332-346, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:1596-1609. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.