IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ijbist/v8y2012i2n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Double-Robust Estimators: Slightly More Bayesian than Meets the Eye?

Author

Listed:
  • Gustafson Paul

    (University of British Columbia)

Abstract

Consider the simple setting of point exposure, outcome and confounding variables, all of which are discrete. As is well known, parametric modeling of outcome given exposure and confounders and also exposure given confounders can yield a double-robust estimator. This has the property of being consistent as long as at least one of the two specified models is correct. Such an estimator can also be cast as arising from a compromise between the parametric outcome model and a nonparametric or saturated outcome model. This brings to mind an alternate compromise based on Bayesian model averaging, and prompts comparisons between the double-robust method and the Bayesian method.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustafson Paul, 2012. "Double-Robust Estimators: Slightly More Bayesian than Meets the Eye?," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:8:y:2012:i:2:n:4
    DOI: 10.2202/1557-4679.1349
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1557-4679.1349
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1557-4679.1349?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lefebvre Geneviève & Gustafson Paul, 2010. "Impact of Outcome Model Misspecification on Regression and Doubly-Robust Inverse Probability Weighting to Estimate Causal Effect," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Heejung Bang & James M. Robins, 2005. "Doubly Robust Estimation in Missing Data and Causal Inference Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 962-973, December.
    3. James Robins & Andrea Rotnitzky & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2007. "Discussions," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 650-653, September.
    4. Zhiqiang Tan, 2010. "Bounded, efficient and doubly robust estimation with inverse weighting," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 97(3), pages 661-682.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luo, Yu & Graham, Daniel J. & McCoy, Emma J., 2023. "Semiparametric Bayesian doubly robust causal estimation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Alessandra Mattei & Fabrizia Mealli, 2015. "Discussion of “On Bayesian Estimation of Marginal Structural Models”," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 293-296, June.
    3. O. Saarela & L. R. Belzile & D. A. Stephens, 2016. "A Bayesian view of doubly robust causal inference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 103(3), pages 667-681.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Uysal, S. Derya, 2013. "Doubly Robust Estimation of Causal Effects with Multivalued Treatments," Economics Series 297, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    2. Satoshi Hattori & Masayuki Henmi, 2014. "Stratified doubly robust estimators for the average causal effect," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 270-277, June.
    3. Ruben Dezeure & Peter Bühlmann & Cun-Hui Zhang, 2017. "Rejoinder on: High-dimensional simultaneous inference with the bootstrap," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 26(4), pages 751-758, December.
    4. Hao Cheng & Ying Wei, 2018. "A fast imputation algorithm in quantile regression," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1589-1603, December.
    5. Iván Díaz & Elizabeth Colantuoni & Daniel F. Hanley & Michael Rosenblum, 2019. "Improved precision in the analysis of randomized trials with survival outcomes, without assuming proportional hazards," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 439-468, July.
    6. Xiaogang Duan & Guosheng Yin, 2017. "Ensemble Approaches to Estimating the Population Mean with Missing Response," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 44(4), pages 899-917, December.
    7. Siying Guo & Jianxuan Liu & Qiu Wang, 2022. "Effective Learning During COVID-19: Multilevel Covariates Matching and Propensity Score Matching," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 967-982, October.
    8. Zhiwei Zhang & Zhen Chen & James F. Troendle & Jun Zhang, 2012. "Causal Inference on Quantiles with an Obstetric Application," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 697-706, September.
    9. Susan Gruber & Mark J. van der Laan, 2013. "An Application of Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation to the Meta-Analysis of Safety Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 254-262, March.
    10. Difang Huang & Jiti Gao & Tatsushi Oka, 2022. "Semiparametric Single-Index Estimation for Average Treatment Effects," Papers 2206.08503, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    11. Donatien Eze Eze, 2019. "Microfinance programs and domestic violence in northern Cameroon; the case of the Familial Rural Income Improvement Program," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 947-967, September.
    12. Karel Vermeulen & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2015. "Bias-Reduced Doubly Robust Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(511), pages 1024-1036, September.
    13. Farrell, Max H., 2015. "Robust inference on average treatment effects with possibly more covariates than observations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-23.
    14. Daniel, Rhian M. & Kenward, Michael G., 2012. "A method for increasing the robustness of multiple imputation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1624-1643.
    15. Jiaming Mao & Jingzhi Xu, 2020. "Ensemble Learning with Statistical and Structural Models," Papers 2006.05308, arXiv.org.
    16. Słoczyński, Tymon & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2018. "A General Double Robustness Result For Estimating Average Treatment Effects," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 112-133, February.
    17. Peisong Han, 2016. "Combining Inverse Probability Weighting and Multiple Imputation to Improve Robustness of Estimation," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 43(1), pages 246-260, March.
    18. Huiming Lin & Bo Fu & Guoyou Qin & Zhongyi Zhu, 2017. "Doubly robust estimation of generalized partial linear models for longitudinal data with dropouts," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1132-1139, December.
    19. repec:bla:istatr:v:83:y:2015:i:3:p:449-471 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Shixiao Zhang & Peisong Han & Changbao Wu, 2023. "Calibration Techniques Encompassing Survey Sampling, Missing Data Analysis and Causal Inference," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(2), pages 165-192, August.
    21. Radice Rosalba & Ramsahai Roland & Grieve Richard & Kreif Noemi & Sadique Zia & Sekhon Jasjeet S., 2012. "Evaluating treatment effectiveness in patient subgroups: a comparison of propensity score methods with an automated matching approach," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-45, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:8:y:2012:i:2:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.