arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1908.01333stat.ME

在因果研究中利用随机分配填补缺失协变量

Leveraging Random Assignment to Impute Missing Covariates in Causal Studies

Gauri Kamat, Jerome P. Reiter

AI总结:

针对随机实验中协变量缺失影响治疗效应估计的问题,研究对比了均值填补、回归单一填补、多重填补三类方法在遵循/忽略随机化原则下的表现,发现考虑随机化仅能小幅提升填补准确性,为异质性治疗效应估计中的协变量填补提供参考。

摘要:

随机实验中的基线协变量常用于估计治疗效应,例如在协变量定义的亚组中估计治疗效应时。但在实际应用中,部分研究对象的协变量值可能缺失。为处理缺失值,分析人员可使用填补方法生成完整数据集,再据此估计治疗效应。常见的填补方法包括均值填补、基于回归的单一填补和多重填补。针对上述每种方法,我们研究了在填补流程中利用随机治疗分配的益处,即利用各治疗组的真实协变量分布相同这一事实。我们通过模拟研究开展分析,对比了遵循或忽略随机化原则时的推断质量。我们分别考察了仅使用协变量的填补流程,以及纳入结果变量的填补流程。在我们的模拟场景中,无论哪种情况,考虑随机化仅能在准确性上带来小幅提升。我们的研究结果也阐明了,当研究者旨在估计异质性治疗效应时,这些不同流程在随机实验缺失协变量填补中的表现。

英文摘要:

Baseline covariates in randomized experiments are often used in the estimation of treatment effects, for example, when estimating treatment effects within covariate-defined subgroups. In practice, however, covariate values may be missing for some data subjects. To handle missing values, analysts can use imputation methods to create completed datasets, from which they can estimate treatment effects. Common imputation methods include mean imputation, single imputation via regression, and multiple imputation. For each of these methods, we investigate the benefits of leveraging randomized treatment assignment in the imputation routines, that is, making use of the fact that the true covariate distributions are the same across treatment arms. We do so using simulation studies that compare the quality of inferences when we respect or disregard the randomization. We consider this question for imputation routines implemented using covariates only, and imputation routines implemented using the outcome variable. In either case, accounting for randomization offers only small gains in accuracy for our simulation scenarios. Our results also shed light on the performances of these different procedures for imputing missing covariates in randomized experiments when one seeks to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑