What does this research mean for the field?

When estimating the complier average causal effect (CACE), the exclusion restriction-based joint approach is less sensitive to its assumptions than the principal ignorability-based propensity score method, and both methods perform better when strong predictors of compliance are present. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.METHODOLOGICAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

October 3, 2011Statistical Methods in Medical ResearchOpen Access

Assessing the sensitivity of methods for estimating principal causal effects

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

ESElizabeth A. StuartJohns Hopkins University BJBooil JoStanford University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Cite This Study

Stuart et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aaa62efef040b60f32aab83 https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280211421840

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

October 3, 2011Statistical Methods in Medical ResearchOpen Access

Assessing the sensitivity of methods for estimating principal causal effects

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

ESElizabeth A. StuartJohns Hopkins University BJBooil JoStanford University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Cite This Study

Stuart et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aaa62efef040b60f32aab83 https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280211421840

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark