Optimizing Balance and Sample Size in Matching Methods for Causal Inference
نویسندگان
چکیده
We propose a greatly simplified approach to matching for causal inference that simultaneously optimizes both balance (between the treated and control groups) and matched sample size. This procedure resolves two widespread (bias-variance trade off-related) tensions in the use of this powerful and popular methodology. First, current practice is to run a matching method that maximizes one balance metric (such as a propensity score or average Mahalanobis distance), but then to check whether it succeeds with respect to a different balance metric for which it was not designed (such as differences in means or L1). Second, current matching methods either fix the sample size and maximize balance (e.g., Mahalanobis or propensity score matching), fix balance and maximize the sample size (such as coarsened exact matching), or are arbitrary compromises between the two (such as calipers with ad hoc thresholds applied to other methods). These tensions lead researchers to either try to optimize manually, by iteratively tweaking their matching method and rechecking balance, or settle for suboptimal solutions. We address these tensions by first defining the frontier in the balance-sample size trade-off as the set of matching solutions with maximum balance for each possible sample size. Researchers can then choose one, several, or all matching solutions from the frontier for analysis. Computation is fast and requires no iteration or manual tweaking. We offer easy-to-use software that implements these ideas and present a range of empirical analyses that demonstrate their value. ∗Our thanks to Carter Coberley, Stefano Iacus, Giuseppe Porro, and Aaron Wells. †Albert J. Weatherhead III University Professor, Institute for Quantitative Social Science, 1737 Cambridge Street, Harvard University, Cambridge MA 02138; http://GKing.harvard.edu, [email protected], (617) 500-7570. ‡Ph.D. Candidate, Institute for Quantitative Social Science, 1737 Cambridge Street, Harvard University, Cambridge MA 02138. §Assistant Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge MA 02139; http://www.mit.edu/∼rnielsen, [email protected], (857) 998-8039.
منابع مشابه
The Balance-Sample Size Frontier in Matching Methods for Causal Inference
We propose a simplified approach to matching for causal inference that simultaneously optimizes both balance (between the treated and control groups) and matched sample size. This procedure resolves two widespread tensions in the use of this popular methodology. First, current practice is to run a matching method that maximizes one balance metric (such as a propensity score or average Mahalanob...
متن کاملComparative Effectiveness of Matching Methods for Causal Inference
Matching methods for causal inference selectively prune observations from the data in order to reduce model dependence. They are successful when simultaneously maximizing balance (between the treated and control groups on the pre-treatment covariates) and the number of observations remaining in the data set. However, existing matching methods either fix the matched sample size ex ante and attem...
متن کاملEvaluating Propensity Score Methods in a Quasi-Experimental Study of the Impact of Menu-Labeling
BACKGROUND Quasi-experimental studies of menu labeling have found mixed results for improving diet. Differences between experimental groups can hinder interpretation. Propensity scores are an increasingly common method to improve covariate balance, but multiple methods exist and the improvements associated with each method have rarely been compared. In this re-analysis of the impact of menu lab...
متن کاملCovariate balancing propensity score
The propensity score plays a central role in a variety of causal inference settings. In particular, matching and weighting methods based on the estimated propensity score have become increasingly common in the analysis of observational data. Despite their popularity and theoretical appeal, the main practical difficulty of these methods is that the propensity score must be estimated. Researchers...
متن کاملPropensity Score Methods for Causal Inference with the PSMATCH Procedure
In a randomized study, subjects are randomly assigned to either a treated group or a control group. Random assignment ensures that the distribution of the covariates is the same in both groups and that the treatment effect can be estimated by directly comparing the outcomes for the subjects in the two groups. In contrast, subjects in an observational study are not randomly assigned. In order to...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013