{"title":"治疗加权反向概率的标准误差和置信区间估计的通用 Bootstrap 程序。","authors":"Tenglong Li, Jordan Lawson","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2023.2254541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach is commonly used in propensity score analysis to infer causal effects in regression models. Due to oversized IPTW weights and errors associated with propensity score estimation, the IPTW approach can underestimate the standard error of causal effect. To remediate this, bootstrap standard errors have been recommended to replace the IPTW standard error, but the ordinary bootstrap (OB) procedure might still result in underestimation of the standard error because of its inefficient resampling scheme and untreated oversized weights. In this paper, we develop a generalized bootstrap (GB) procedure for estimating the standard error and confidence intervals of the IPTW approach. Compared with the OB procedure and other three procedures in comparison, the GB procedure has the highest precision and yields conservative standard error estimates. As a result, the GB procedure produces short confidence intervals with highest coverage rates. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the GB procedure <i>via</i> two simulation studies and a dataset from the National Educational Longitudinal Study-1988 (NELS-88).</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"251-265"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Generalized Bootstrap Procedure of the Standard Error and Confidence Interval Estimation for Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting.\",\"authors\":\"Tenglong Li, Jordan Lawson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00273171.2023.2254541\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach is commonly used in propensity score analysis to infer causal effects in regression models. Due to oversized IPTW weights and errors associated with propensity score estimation, the IPTW approach can underestimate the standard error of causal effect. To remediate this, bootstrap standard errors have been recommended to replace the IPTW standard error, but the ordinary bootstrap (OB) procedure might still result in underestimation of the standard error because of its inefficient resampling scheme and untreated oversized weights. In this paper, we develop a generalized bootstrap (GB) procedure for estimating the standard error and confidence intervals of the IPTW approach. Compared with the OB procedure and other three procedures in comparison, the GB procedure has the highest precision and yields conservative standard error estimates. As a result, the GB procedure produces short confidence intervals with highest coverage rates. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the GB procedure <i>via</i> two simulation studies and a dataset from the National Educational Longitudinal Study-1988 (NELS-88).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"251-265\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2023.2254541\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2023.2254541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Generalized Bootstrap Procedure of the Standard Error and Confidence Interval Estimation for Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting.
The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach is commonly used in propensity score analysis to infer causal effects in regression models. Due to oversized IPTW weights and errors associated with propensity score estimation, the IPTW approach can underestimate the standard error of causal effect. To remediate this, bootstrap standard errors have been recommended to replace the IPTW standard error, but the ordinary bootstrap (OB) procedure might still result in underestimation of the standard error because of its inefficient resampling scheme and untreated oversized weights. In this paper, we develop a generalized bootstrap (GB) procedure for estimating the standard error and confidence intervals of the IPTW approach. Compared with the OB procedure and other three procedures in comparison, the GB procedure has the highest precision and yields conservative standard error estimates. As a result, the GB procedure produces short confidence intervals with highest coverage rates. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the GB procedure via two simulation studies and a dataset from the National Educational Longitudinal Study-1988 (NELS-88).
期刊介绍:
Multivariate Behavioral Research (MBR) publishes a variety of substantive, methodological, and theoretical articles in all areas of the social and behavioral sciences. Most MBR articles fall into one of two categories. Substantive articles report on applications of sophisticated multivariate research methods to study topics of substantive interest in personality, health, intelligence, industrial/organizational, and other behavioral science areas. Methodological articles present and/or evaluate new developments in multivariate methods, or address methodological issues in current research. We also encourage submission of integrative articles related to pedagogy involving multivariate research methods, and to historical treatments of interest and relevance to multivariate research methods.