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。

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:摘要直接讨论交错处理采用、单位与时期层面的处理效应检验,涉及因果推断及跨单位跨时期的面板研究设计。

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
Azeem M. Shaikh
Panos Toulis

交错采用处理的观察性研究中的随机化检验

研究问题
在不同单位于不同时间采用处理的观察性研究中,如何利用采用时间模型检验所有单位、所有时期在分布意义上均无处理效应?
方法与思路
作者结合条件无混杂假设与 Cox 比例风险采用时间模型,先研究参数已知的检验,再以一致估计参数构造可行检验。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称参数已知检验具有有限样本水平控制,而参数估计后的可行检验具有渐近水平控制,并考察模型误设及烟草立法应用。
阅读关注点
应核对采用时间无同时发生的限制、条件无混杂与 Cox 模型的作用,以及参数估计如何影响随机化分布和检验水平。
阅读边界
来源为稿件版本未注明的索引摘要,无法判断刊本变化;可行检验仅被摘要称为渐近有效,误设模拟不构成普遍稳健性保证。

原文摘要

This article considers the problem of inference in observational studies with time-varying adoption of treatment. In addition to an unconfoundedness assumption that the potential outcomes are independent of the times at which units adopt treatment conditional on the units’ observed characteristics, our analysis assumes that the time at which each unit adopts treatment follows a Cox proportional hazards model. This assumption permits the time at which each unit adopts treatment to depend on the observed characteristics of the unit, but imposes the restriction that the probability of multiple units adopting treatment at the same time is zero. In this context, we study randomization tests of a null hypothesis that specifies that there is no treatment effect for all units and all time periods in a distributional sense. We first show that an infeasible test that treats the parameters of the Cox model as known has rejection probability under the null hypothesis no greater than the nominal level in finite samples. Since these parameters are unknown in practice, this result motivates a feasible test that replaces these parameters with consistent estimators. While the resulting test does not need to have the same finite-sample validity as the infeasible test, we show that it has limiting rejection probability under the null hypothesis no greater than the nominal level. In a simulation study, we examine the practical relevance of our theoretical results, including robustness to misspecification of the model for the time at which each unit adopts treatment. Finally, we provide an empirical application of our methodology using the synthetic control-based test statistic and tobacco legislation data found in Abadie, Diamond and Hainmueller. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文