跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要直接研究内生性与未观测混杂下的处理效应双重稳健估计。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Sahil Shikalgar
Md. Noor-E-Alam

基于 Copula 的处理效应双重稳健估计内生性修正

研究问题
当医疗研究中的代理协变量因未观测混杂或测量误差而内生时,如何修正处理模型与结果模型中的双重稳健估计偏差?
方法与思路
作者以高斯 Copula 描述内生协变量与误差项的联合分布,在不使用工具变量的情况下构造修正的双重稳健估计量。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要声称方法保留双重稳健性,模拟中修正了内生性偏差;营养咨询应用中,修正后的血压效应不再显著。
阅读关注点
应重点核对无工具变量时的识别来源、Copula 与边际分布限制,以及双重稳健结论是否额外要求内生性模型正确。
阅读边界
这是 arXiv 预印本,同行评审或期刊接收未核实;摘要未给出识别条件,不能据此认定任意未观测混杂均可修正。

原文摘要

Doubly Robust (DR) estimation of treatment effect relies on an untestable assumption that is the absence of unobserved confounding. This assumption is par- ticularly problematic in the context of healthcare research, where variables like pre- scription refill rates serve as proxies for unobserved behaviors such as medication adherence. These proxy variables are often endogenous, exhibiting correlation with the regression error term due to unmeasured confounding or measurement error. We propose a copula-corrected doubly robust estimator that addresses endogeneity in both the treatment and outcome models without requiring instrumental variables. Gaussian copulas model the joint distribution of endogenous covariates and the error term, enabling consistent estimation while preserving the doubly robust property that requires correct specification of either the treatment or outcome model, not both. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate that naive DR estimation exhibits substantial bias under endogeneity, whereas our corrected estimator recovers unbiased treatment effects across different data-generating processes. We apply our method to examine the effect of nutritional counseling on blood pressure using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data. Naive DR estimation suggests counseling is associated with increased blood pressure. After copula correction, this effect becomes statistically insignificant, consistent with literature showing modest effects of nutri- Counseling in reducing blood pressure. Our methodology provides researchers with a practical tool for obtaining treatment effects in the presence of endogeneity.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文