↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian Approach for Addressing Differential Covariate Measurement Error in Propensity Score Methods

Overview of attention for article published in Psychometrika, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Bayesian Approach for Addressing Differential Covariate Measurement Error in Propensity Score Methods
Published in
Psychometrika, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11336-016-9533-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hwanhee Hong, Kara E. Rudolph, Elizabeth A. Stuart

Abstract

Propensity score methods are an important tool to help reduce confounding in non-experimental studies and produce more accurate causal effect estimates. Most propensity score methods assume that covariates are measured without error. However, covariates are often measured with error. Recent work has shown that ignoring such error could lead to bias in treatment effect estimates. In this paper, we consider an additional complication: that of differential measurement error across treatment groups, such as can occur if a covariate is measured differently in the treatment and control groups. We propose two flexible Bayesian approaches for handling differential measurement error when estimating average causal effects using propensity score methods. We consider three scenarios: systematic (i.e., a location shift), heteroscedastic (i.e., different variances), and mixed (both systematic and heteroscedastic) measurement errors. We also explore various prior choices (i.e., weakly informative or point mass) on the sensitivity parameters related to the differential measurement error. We present results from simulation studies evaluating the performance of the proposed methods and apply these approaches to an example estimating the effect of neighborhood disadvantage on adolescent drug use disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 18%
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Professor 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Psychology 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 August 2018.
All research outputs
#13,247,635
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Psychometrika
#309
of 503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,905
of 319,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychometrika
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 319,487 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them