In matched observational studies with continuous treatments, individuals with different treatment doses but the same or similar covariate values are paired for causal inference. While inexact covariate matching (i. e. , covariate imbalance after matching) is common in practice, previous matched studies with continuous treatments have often overlooked this issue as long as post-matching covariate balance meets certain criteria. Through re-analyzing a matched observational study on the effect of social distancing on COVID-19 case counts, we show that this routine practice can introduce severe bias for causal inference. Motivated by this finding, we propose a general framework for mitigating bias due to inexact matching in matched observational studies with continuous treatments, covering the matching, estimation, and inference stages. In the matching stage, we propose a carefully designed caliper that incorporates both covariate and treatment dose information to improve matching for downstream treatment effect estimation and inference. For the estimation and inference, we introduce a bias-corrected Neyman estimator paired with a corresponding bias-corrected variance estimator. The effectiveness of our proposed framework is demonstrated through numerical studies and a re-analysis of the aforementioned observational study on the effect of social distancing on COVID-19 case counts. An open-source R package for implementing our framework has also been developed.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Frazier et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69a135ebed1d949a99abfe0d — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomtc/ujag022
Angel Frazier
Agricultural Research Service
Siyu Heng
New York University
Wen Zhou
Biometrics
New York University
Colorado State University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...