The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A comparison of two methods of estimating propensity scores after multiple imputation

A comparison of two methods of estimating propensity scores after multiple imputation
A comparison of two methods of estimating propensity scores after multiple imputation
In many observational studies, analysts estimate treatment effects using propensity scores, e.g., by matching or sub classifying on the scores. When some values of the covariates are missing, analysts can use multiple imputation to fill in the missing data, estimate propensity scores based on the m completed datasets, and use the propensity scores to estimate treatment effects. We compare two approaches to implementing this process. In the first, the analyst estimates the treatment effect using propensity score matching within each completed data set, and averages the m treatment effect estimates. In the second approach, the analyst averages the m propensity scores for each record across the completed datasets, and performs propensity score matching with these averaged scores to estimate the treatment effect. We compare properties of both methods via simulation studies using artificial and real data. The simulations suggest that the second method has greater potential to produce substantial bias reductions than the first.
missing data, multiple imputation, observational studies, propensity score
M11/05
University of Southampton
Mitra, Robin
2b944cd7-5be8-4dd1-ab44-f8ada9a33405
Reiter, Jerome P.
b70b3bb7-ac77-4dd1-860a-4daa92e02fc2
Mitra, Robin
2b944cd7-5be8-4dd1-ab44-f8ada9a33405
Reiter, Jerome P.
b70b3bb7-ac77-4dd1-860a-4daa92e02fc2

Mitra, Robin and Reiter, Jerome P. (2011) A comparison of two methods of estimating propensity scores after multiple imputation (S3RI Methodology Working Papers, M11/05) Southampton, GB. University of Southampton 21pp.

Record type: Monograph (Working Paper)

Abstract

In many observational studies, analysts estimate treatment effects using propensity scores, e.g., by matching or sub classifying on the scores. When some values of the covariates are missing, analysts can use multiple imputation to fill in the missing data, estimate propensity scores based on the m completed datasets, and use the propensity scores to estimate treatment effects. We compare two approaches to implementing this process. In the first, the analyst estimates the treatment effect using propensity score matching within each completed data set, and averages the m treatment effect estimates. In the second approach, the analyst averages the m propensity scores for each record across the completed datasets, and performs propensity score matching with these averaged scores to estimate the treatment effect. We compare properties of both methods via simulation studies using artificial and real data. The simulations suggest that the second method has greater potential to produce substantial bias reductions than the first.

Text
s3ri-workingpaper-M11-05.pdf - Other
Download (327kB)

More information

Published date: 14 April 2011
Keywords: missing data, multiple imputation, observational studies, propensity score
Organisations: Statistical Sciences Research Institute, Southampton Statistical Research Inst.

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 181545
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/181545
PURE UUID: 172147b2-5e51-4e72-90f4-cdf9ced8c917

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 Apr 2011 10:34
Last modified: 29 Jan 2020 14:26

Export record

Contributors

Author: Robin Mitra
Author: Jerome P. Reiter

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×