Skip Navigation

Biometrika 1987 74(1):13-26; doi:10.1093/biomet/74.1.13
© 1987 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ROSENBAUM, P. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Sensitivity analysis for certain permutation inferences in matched observational studies

PAUL R. ROSENBAUM

Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, U.S.A.

In observational studies, treatments are not randomly assigned to experimental units, so that randomization tests and their associated interval estimates are not generally applicable. In an effort to compensate for the lack of randomization, treated and control units are often matched on the basis of observed covariates; however, the possibility remains of bias due to residual imbalances in unobserved covariates. A general though simple method is proposed for displaying the sensitivity of permutation inferences to a range of assumptions about unobserved covariates in matched observational studies. The sensitivity analysis is applicable to Wilcoxon's signed rank test, to the McNemar-Cox test for paired binary responses, and to some matching problems with a variable number of controls.

Key Words: Logit model • Observational study • Permutation test • Probability inequalities • Propensity score • Reflection group • Sensitivity analysis


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
T. Sturmer, S. Schneeweiss, K. J. Rothman, J. Avorn, and R. J. Glynn
Performance of Propensity Score Calibration--A Simulation Study
Am. J. Epidemiol., May 15, 2007; 165(10): 1110 - 1118.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
T. Sturmer, S. Schneeweiss, J. Avorn, and R. J. Glynn
Adjusting Effect Estimates for Unmeasured Confounding with Validation Data using Propensity Score Calibration
Am. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2005; 162(3): 279 - 289.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
S.-L. T Normand, K. Sykora, P. Li, M. Mamdani, P. A Rochon, and G. M Anderson
Readers guide to critical appraisal of cohort studies: 3. Analytical strategies to reduce confounding
BMJ, April 30, 2005; 330(7498): 1021 - 1023.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
S. M. Marcus
Using Omitted Variable Bias to Assess Uncertainty in the Estimation of an AIDS Education Treatment Effect
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1997; 22(2): 193 - 201.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
P. R. Rosenbaum
Safety in Caution
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1989; 14(2): 169 - 173.
[PDF]

Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
H. Wainer
Responsum
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1989; 14(2): 187 - 199.
[PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.