IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v168y2021ics0167715220302546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determination of the optimal number of strata for propensity score subclassification

Author

Listed:
  • Orihara, Shunichiro
  • Hamada, Etsuo

Abstract

In observational studies, propensity score methods are useful for estimating causal effects. We propose a new method for selecting the optimal number of strata for subclassification on the propensity score. The proposed method achieves “optimality” in terms of the MSE.

Suggested Citation

  • Orihara, Shunichiro & Hamada, Etsuo, 2021. "Determination of the optimal number of strata for propensity score subclassification," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:168:y:2021:i:c:s0167715220302546
    DOI: 10.1016/j.spl.2020.108951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167715220302546
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.spl.2020.108951?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
    ---><---

    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. Takamichi Baba & Takayuki Kanemori & Yoshiyuki Ninomiya, 2017. "A $C_p$ criterion for semiparametric causal inference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 104(4), pages 845-861.
    2. Kosuke Imai & Marc Ratkovic, 2014. "Covariate balancing propensity score," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 76(1), pages 243-263, January.
    3. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881.
    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. Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song & Qi Xu, 2022. "Covariate distribution balance via propensity scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1093-1120, September.
    2. Caloffi, Annalisa & Freo, Marzia & Ghinoi, Stefano & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica, 2022. "Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    3. Ott, Laurent & Weber, Sylvain, 2022. "How effective is carbon taxation on residential heating demand? A household-level analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Soojin Park & Peter M. Steiner & David Kaplan, 2018. "Identification and Sensitivity Analysis for Average Causal Mediation Effects with Time-Varying Treatments and Mediators: Investigating the Underlying Mechanisms of Kindergarten Retention Policy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(2), pages 298-320, June.
    5. Stefano Carattini & Suphi Sen, 2019. "Carbon Taxes and Stranded Assets: Evidence from Washington State," CESifo Working Paper Series 7785, CESifo.
    6. 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.
    7. Francesca Caselli & Mr. Philippe Wingender, 2018. "Bunching at 3 Percent: The Maastricht Fiscal Criterion and Government Deficits," IMF Working Papers 2018/182, International Monetary Fund.
    8. Tamara Bischof & Boris Kaiser, 2021. "Who cares when you close down? The effects of primary care practice closures on patients," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 2004-2025, September.
    9. Tenglong Li & Jordan Lawson, 2021. "A generalized bootstrap procedure of the standard error and confidence interval estimation for inverse probability of treatment weighting," Papers 2109.00171, arXiv.org.
    10. Shixiao Zhang & Peisong Han & Changbao Wu, 2023. "Calibration Techniques Encompassing Survey Sampling, Missing Data Analysis and Causal Inference," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(2), pages 165-192, August.
    11. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & Susan Athey & David A. Hirshberg & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Synthetic Difference-in-Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(12), pages 4088-4118, December.
    12. Kallus Nathan & Santacatterina Michele, 2021. "Optimal balancing of time-dependent confounders for marginal structural models," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 345-369, January.
    13. Brian G. Vegetabile & Daniel L. Gillen & Hal S. Stern, 2020. "Optimally balanced Gaussian process propensity scores for estimating treatment effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(1), pages 355-377, January.
    14. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    15. Sakaue, Katsuki & Wokadala, James, 2022. "Effects of including refugees in local government schools on pupils’ learning achievement: Evidence from West Nile, Uganda," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    16. Lundberg, Ian & Brand, Jennie E. & Jeon, Nanum, 2022. "Researcher reasoning meets computational capacity: Machine learning for social science," SocArXiv s5zc8, Center for Open Science.
    17. Nikolay Doudchenko & Guido W. Imbens, 2016. "Balancing, Regression, Difference-In-Differences and Synthetic Control Methods: A Synthesis," NBER Working Papers 22791, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Plamen Nikolov & Hongjian Wang & Kevin Acker, 2020. "Wage premium of Communist Party membership: Evidence from China," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 309-338, August.
    19. Sisira Sarma & Nirav Mehta & Rose Anne Devlin & Koffi Ahoto Kpelitse & Lihua Li, 2018. "Family physician remuneration schemes and specialist referrals: Quasi‐experimental evidence from Ontario, Canada," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(10), pages 1533-1549, October.
    20. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & Guido W. Imbens, 2019. "Doubly Robust Identification for Causal Panel Data Models," Papers 1909.09412, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.

    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:stapro:v:168:y:2021:i:c:s0167715220302546. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.