IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v55y2011i4p1596-1609.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Qihua
  • Lai, Peng

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Qihua & Lai, Peng, 2011. "Empirical likelihood calibration estimation for the median treatment difference in observational studies," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 1596-1609, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:1596-1609
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(10)00355-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. LaLonde, 1984. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," Working Papers 563, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    2. Sergio Firpo, 2007. "Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Quantile Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 259-276, January.
    3. 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.
    4. 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, February.
    5. Changbao Wu, 2003. "Optimal calibration estimators in survey sampling," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 90(4), pages 937-951, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Qihua Wang & J. N. K. Rao, 2002. "Empirical Likelihood‐based Inference in Linear Models with Missing Data," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 29(3), pages 563-576, September.
    8. Alberto Abadie & David Drukker & Jane Leber Herr & Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 4(3), pages 290-311, September.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jiang, Shan & Tu, Dongsheng, 2012. "Inference on the probability P(T1," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(5), pages 1069-1078.
    2. Arpino, Bruno & Mealli, Fabrizia, 2011. "The specification of the propensity score in multilevel observational studies," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 1770-1780, April.

    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. Biao Zhang, 2016. "Empirical Likelihood in Causal Inference," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 201-231, February.
    2. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    3. Liugen Xue, 2009. "Empirical Likelihood Confidence Intervals for Response Mean with Data Missing at Random," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 36(4), pages 671-685, December.
    4. Wang, Qihua & Su, Miaomiao & Wang, Ruoyu, 2021. "A beyond multiple robust approach for missing response problem," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    6. Sokbae Lee & Yoon-Jae Whang, 2009. "Nonparametric Tests of Conditional Treatment Effects," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1740, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    7. Chen, Songxi, 2013. "Mann-Whitney Test with Adjustments to Pre-treatment Variables for Missing Values and Observational Study," MPRA Paper 46239, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bryan S. Graham & Cristine Campos De Xavier Pinto & Daniel Egel, 2012. "Inverse Probability Tilting for Moment Condition Models with Missing Data," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(3), pages 1053-1079.
    9. Maoyong Fan & Yanhong Jin, 2015. "The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Childhood Obesity in the United States: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 432-460, Fall.
    10. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    11. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    12. Kitagawa, Toru & Muris, Chris, 2016. "Model averaging in semiparametric estimation of treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 271-289.
    13. Sascha O. Becker & Marco Caliendo, 2007. "Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(1), pages 71-83, February.
    14. Richard K. Crump & V. Joseph Hotz & Guido W. Imbens & Oscar A. Mitnik, 2006. "Moving the Goalposts: Addressing Limited Overlap in the Estimation of Average Treatment Effects by Changing the Estimand," NBER Technical Working Papers 0330, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. David McKenzie & John Gibson & Steven Stillman, 2010. "How Important Is Selection? Experimental vs. Non-Experimental Measures of the Income Gains from Migration," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(4), pages 913-945, June.
    16. Richard K. Crump & V. Joseph Hotz & Guido W. Imbens & Oscar A. Mitnik, 2009. "Dealing with limited overlap in estimation of average treatment effects," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 96(1), pages 187-199.
    17. Tommaso Nannicini, 2007. "Simulation-based sensitivity analysis for matching estimators," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 334-350, September.
    18. McKenzie, David & Gibson, John & Stillman, Steven, 2006. "How important is selection ? Experimental versus non-experimental measures of the income gains from migration," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3906, The World Bank.
    19. Dettmann, Eva & Becker, Claudia & Schmeißer, Christian, 2010. "Is there a Superior Distance Function for Matching in Small Samples?," IWH Discussion Papers 3/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    20. 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).

    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:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:1596-1609. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    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.