↓ Skip to main content

Treatment Effect Estimation Using Nonlinear Two‐Stage Instrumental Variable Estimators: Another Cautionary Note

Overview of attention for article published in Health Services Research, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Treatment Effect Estimation Using Nonlinear Two‐Stage Instrumental Variable Estimators: Another Cautionary Note
Published in
Health Services Research, February 2016
DOI 10.1111/1475-6773.12463
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To examine the settings of simulation evidence supporting use of nonlinear two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI) instrumental variable (IV) methods for estimating average treatment effects (ATE) using observational data and investigate potential bias of 2SRI across alternative scenarios of essential heterogeneity and uniqueness of marginal patients. Potential bias of linear and nonlinear IV methods for ATE and local average treatment effects (LATE) is assessed using simulation models with a binary outcome and binary endogenous treatment across settings varying by the relationship between treatment effectiveness and treatment choice. Results show that nonlinear 2SRI models produce estimates of ATE and LATE that are substantially biased when the relationships between treatment and outcome for marginal patients are unique from relationships for the full population. Bias of linear IV estimates for LATE was low across all scenarios. Researchers are increasingly opting for nonlinear 2SRI to estimate treatment effects in models with binary and otherwise inherently nonlinear dependent variables, believing that it produces generally unbiased and consistent estimates. This research shows that positive properties of nonlinear 2SRI rely on assumptions about the relationships between treatment effect heterogeneity and choice.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Researcher 6 15%
Professor 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 12 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 09 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,134,355
of 28,815,917 outputs
Outputs from Health Services Research
#786
of 2,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,360
of 317,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Services Research
#17
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,815,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,776 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 317,551 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.