Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com> |
To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
Subject | Re: st: Re: psmatch2 question |
Date | Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:51:43 -0400 |
-- Anna, First, I must apologize. I showed a method for estimating the ATT (weighting by propensity scores) which is different from the one that -psmatch2- uses (matching on propensity scores). So my prgoram. does not apply to your analysis. The -help- for -psmatch2- illustrates a bootstrap approach to estimating the standard error, although it states that it is "unclear whether the bootstrap is valid in this context." Also, there is literature (see page 26 of Austin Nichol's presentation http://repec.org/dcon09/dc09_nichols.pdf) which suggests that estimated propensity scores might be more accurate than the unknown true scores; if so, then standard errors which consider the estimated scores as known might be better than the bootstrapped standard errors! So there is apparently no right answer. I think that a conservative approach would be to use the -bootstrap- technique shown in the -psmatch2- help, followed by "estat bootstrap, all" to get confidence intervals for ATT. ATT is one of several methods for describing the causal effect of a treatment: To quote Austin's presentation (p 15): "For evaluating the effect of a treatment/intervention/program, we may want to estimate the ATE for participants (the average treatment effect on the treated, or ATT) or for potential participants who are currently not treated (the average treatment effect on controls, or ATC), or the ATE across the whole population (or even for just the sample under study)." Best wishes Steve -- Steven Samuels sjsamuels@gmail.com 18 Cantine's Island Saugerties NY 12477 USA Voice: 845-246-0774 Fax: 206-202-4783 On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 7:23 PM, anna bargagliotti <abargag@yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you for your insights about bootstrapping. I wiill try adjusting your > code to my situation to reproduce the T-stat and compute the p-value. > > I am, however, still confused about two very simple things: > 1. What is the T-stat for the ATT actually telling us? Is this the T-stat for > the comparison of treatment vs control matched groups? > 2. How do we determine if there is a treatment effect? > > > > > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/