↓ Skip to main content

Regression Discontinuity for Causal Effect Estimation in Epidemiology

Overview of attention for article published in Current Epidemiology Reports, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 213)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Regression Discontinuity for Causal Effect Estimation in Epidemiology
Published in
Current Epidemiology Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40471-016-0080-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine E. Oldenburg, Ellen Moscoe, Till Bärnighausen

Abstract

Regression discontinuity analyses can generate estimates of the causal effects of an exposure when a continuously measured variable is used to assign the exposure to individuals based on a threshold rule. Individuals just above the threshold are expected to be similar in their distribution of measured and unmeasured baseline covariates to individuals just below the threshold, resulting in exchangeability. At the threshold exchangeability is guaranteed if there is random variation in the continuous assignment variable, e.g., due to random measurement error. Under exchangeability, causal effects can be identified at the threshold. The regression discontinuity intention-to-treat (RD-ITT) effect on an outcome can be estimated as the difference in the outcome between individuals just above (or below) versus just below (or above) the threshold. This effect is analogous to the ITT effect in a randomized controlled trial. Instrumental variable methods can be used to estimate the effect of exposure itself utilizing the threshold as the instrument. We review the recent epidemiologic literature reporting regression discontinuity studies and find that while regression discontinuity designs are beginning to be utilized in a variety of applications in epidemiology, they are still relatively rare, and analytic and reporting practices vary. Regression discontinuity has the potential to greatly contribute to the evidence base in epidemiology, in particular on the real-life and long-term effects and side-effects of medical treatments that are provided based on threshold rules - such as treatments for low birth weight, hypertension or diabetes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 25%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 9%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 29 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2021.
All research outputs
#2,890,438
of 24,330,613 outputs
Outputs from Current Epidemiology Reports
#50
of 213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,399
of 374,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Epidemiology Reports
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,330,613 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 374,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.