Nicholas Illenberger, Dylan S. Small, Pamela A. Shaw
arXiv 10 Sep 2019 · Statistics — Methodology · 2 citations (OpenAlex)
arXiv:1909.04706 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text
To make informed policy recommendations from observational data, we must be able to discern true treatment effects from random noise and effects due to confounding. Difference-in-Difference techniques which match treated units to control units based on pre-treatment outcomes, such as the synthetic control approach have been presented as principled methods to account for confounding. However, we show that use of synthetic controls or other matching procedures can introduce regression to the mean (RTM) bias into estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated. Through simulations, we show RTM bias can lead to inflated type I error rates as well as decreased power in typical policy evaluation settings. Further, we provide a novel correction for RTM bias which can reduce bias and attain appropriate type I error rates. This correction can be used to perform a sensitivity analysis which determines how results may be affected by RTM. We use our proposed correction and sensitivity analysis to reanalyze data concerning the effects of California's Proposition 99, a large-scale tobacco control program, on statewide smoking rates.
appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 97% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.
The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.
| Reference | Intensity | Mentions | Sections | Main text | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alberto Abadie, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller (2010) Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program | 1.000 | 5 | 5 | 100% |
| 2 | Jamie R Daw and Laura A Hatfield (2018) Matching and Regression to the Mean in Difference-in-Differences Analysis | 0.928 | 4 | 4 | 100% |
| * | unmatched citation key * | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 4 | Alberto Abadie (2005) Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 5 | Joshua D Angrist and Jörn-Steffen Pischke (2008) Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 6 | Sunil Arya, David M Mount, Nathan Netanyahu, Ruth Silverman, and Ang… (1994) An Optimal Algorithm for Approximate Nearest Neighbor Searching in Fixed Dimensions | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 7 | Charles C Branas, Rose A Cheney, John M MacDonald, Vicky W Tam, Tara… (2011) A Difference-in-Differences Analysis of Health, Safety, and Greening Vacant Urban Space | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 8 | Rita Hamad, Akansha Batra, Deborah Karasek, Kaja Z LeWinn, Nicole R… (2019) The Impact of the Revised WIC Food Package on Maternal Nutrition during Pregnancy and Postpartum | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 9 | Rose MC Kagawa, Alvaro Castillo-Carniglia, Jon S Vernick, Daniel Web… (2018) Repeal of Comprehensive Background Check Policies and Firearm Homicide and Suicide | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| 10 | Timothy L Lash, Matthew P Fox, Richard F MacLehose, George Maldonado… (2014) Good Practices for Quantitative Bias Analysis | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 100% |
Showing the top 10 of 14 scored citations. 1 of these could not be matched to a bibliography entry, so only the citation key is shown.