IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2412.16352.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Counting Defiers in Health Care with a Design-Based Likelihood for the Joint Distribution of Potential Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Neil Christy
  • Amanda Ellen Kowalski

Abstract

We present a design-based model of a randomized experiment in which the observed outcomes are informative about the joint distribution of potential outcomes within the experimental sample. We derive a likelihood function that maintains curvature with respect to the joint distribution of potential outcomes, even when holding the marginal distributions of potential outcomes constant -- curvature that is not maintained in a sampling-based likelihood that imposes a large sample assumption. Our proposed decision rule guesses the joint distribution of potential outcomes in the sample as the distribution that maximizes the likelihood. We show that this decision rule is Bayes optimal under a uniform prior. Our optimal decision rule differs from and significantly outperforms a ``monotonicity'' decision rule that assumes no defiers or no compliers. In sample sizes ranging from 2 to 40, we show that the Bayes expected utility of the optimal rule increases relative to the monotonicity rule as the sample size increases. In two experiments in health care, we show that the joint distribution of potential outcomes that maximizes the likelihood need not include compliers even when the average outcome in the intervention group exceeds the average outcome in the control group, and that the maximizer of the likelihood may include both compliers and defiers, even when the average intervention effect is large and statistically significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Neil Christy & Amanda Ellen Kowalski, 2024. "Counting Defiers in Health Care with a Design-Based Likelihood for the Joint Distribution of Potential Outcomes," Papers 2412.16352, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2412.16352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.16352
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guido W. Imbens, 2020. "Potential Outcome and Directed Acyclic Graph Approaches to Causality: Relevance for Empirical Practice in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1129-1179, December.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Reasonable patient care under uncertainty," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(10), pages 1397-1421, October.
    3. Stoye, Jörg, 2009. "Minimax regret treatment choice with finite samples," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 151(1), pages 70-81, July.
    4. Mullahy, John, 2018. "Individual results may vary: Inequality-probability bounds for some health-outcome treatment effects," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 151-162.
    5. Constantine E. Frangakis & Donald B. Rubin, 2002. "Principal Stratification in Causal Inference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 21-29, March.
    6. Charles F. Manski, 1997. "Monotone Treatment Response," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1311-1334, November.
    7. Dehejia, Rajeev H., 2005. "Program evaluation as a decision problem," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 141-173.
    8. Toru Kitagawa & Aleksey Tetenov, 2018. "Who Should Be Treated? Empirical Welfare Maximization Methods for Treatment Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 591-616, March.
    9. Andrew Gelman & Guido Imbens, 2013. "Why ask Why? Forward Causal Inference and Reverse Causal Questions," NBER Working Papers 19614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Dawid, Philip & Humphreys, Macartan & Musio, Monica, 2022. "Bounding Causes of Effects With Mediators," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue OnlineFir, pages 1-1.
    11. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey Smith & Nancy Clements, 1997. "Making The Most Out Of Programme Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Programme Impacts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 487-535.
    12. Amanda E. Kowalski, 2019. "A Model of a Randomized Experiment with an Application to the PROWESS Clinical Trial," NBER Working Papers 25670, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1221-1246, July.
    14. Tetenov, Aleksey, 2012. "Statistical treatment choice based on asymmetric minimax regret criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 157-165.
    15. Imbens, Guido W & Angrist, Joshua D, 1994. "Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 467-475, March.
    16. Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Response to commentaries on “Reasonable patient care under uncertainty”," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(10), pages 1431-1434, October.
    17. Charles F. Manski, 1997. "The Mixing Problem in Programme Evaluation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 537-553.
    18. Manski, Charles F., 2007. "Minimax-regret treatment choice with missing outcome data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 105-115, July.
    19. Fan, Yanqin & Park, Sang Soo, 2010. "Sharp Bounds On The Distribution Of Treatment Effects And Their Statistical Inference," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 931-951, June.
    20. Stoye, Jörg, 2007. "Minimax Regret Treatment Choice With Incomplete Data And Many Treatments," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 190-199, February.
    21. Stoye, Jörg, 2012. "Minimax regret treatment choice with covariates or with limited validity of experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 138-156.
    22. Peng Ding & Luke W. Miratrix, 2019. "Model‐free causal inference of binary experimental data," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 46(1), pages 200-214, March.
    23. Neil Christy & A. E. Kowalski, 2024. "Starting Small: Prioritizing Safety over Efficacy in Randomized Experiments Using the Exact Finite Sample Likelihood," Papers 2407.18206, arXiv.org.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Neil Christy & A. E. Kowalski, 2024. "Starting Small: Prioritizing Safety over Efficacy in Randomized Experiments Using the Exact Finite Sample Likelihood," Papers 2407.18206, arXiv.org.
    2. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    3. Augustine Denteh & Helge Liebert, 2022. "Who Increases Emergency Department Use? New Insights from the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment," Papers 2201.07072, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    4. Toru Kitagawa & Sokbae Lee & Chen Qiu, 2022. "Treatment Choice with Nonlinear Regret," Papers 2205.08586, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    5. Manski, Charles F., 2023. "Probabilistic prediction for binary treatment choice: With focus on personalized medicine," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 647-663.
    6. Eric Mbakop & Max Tabord‐Meehan, 2021. "Model Selection for Treatment Choice: Penalized Welfare Maximization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(2), pages 825-848, March.
    7. Firpo, Sergio & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kobus, Martyna & Parker, Thomas & Rosa-Dias, Pedro, 2020. "Loss Aversion and the Welfare Ranking of Policy Interventions," IZA Discussion Papers 13176, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Keisuke Hirano & Jack R. Porter, 2016. "Panel Asymptotics and Statistical Decision Theory," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 67(1), pages 33-49, March.
    9. Charles F. Manski, 2021. "Econometrics for Decision Making: Building Foundations Sketched by Haavelmo and Wald," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(6), pages 2827-2853, November.
    10. Timothy Christensen & Hyungsik Roger Moon & Frank Schorfheide, 2020. "Robust Forecasting," Papers 2011.03153, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2020.
    11. Thomas M. Russell, 2020. "Policy Transforms and Learning Optimal Policies," Papers 2012.11046, arXiv.org.
    12. Stoye, Jörg, 2012. "Minimax regret treatment choice with covariates or with limited validity of experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 138-156.
    13. Takanori Ida & Takunori Ishihara & Koichiro Ito & Daido Kido & Toru Kitagawa & Shosei Sakaguchi & Shusaku Sasaki, 2022. "Choosing Who Chooses: Selection-Driven Targeting in Energy Rebate Programs," NBER Working Papers 30469, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Takanori Ida & Takunori Ishihara & Koichiro Ito & Daido Kido & Toru Kitagawa & Shosei Sakaguchi & Shusaku Sasaki, 2021. "Paternalism, Autonomy, or Both? Experimental Evidence from Energy Saving Programs," Papers 2112.09850, arXiv.org.
    15. Daido Kido, 2023. "Locally Asymptotically Minimax Statistical Treatment Rules Under Partial Identification," Papers 2311.08958, arXiv.org.
    16. Toru Kitagawa & Aleksey Tetenov, 2017. "Equality-minded treatment choice," CeMMAP working papers 10/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    17. Davide Viviano & Jess Rudder, 2020. "Policy design in experiments with unknown interference," Papers 2011.08174, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    18. Anders Bredahl Kock & David Preinerstorfer & Bezirgen Veliyev, 2022. "Functional Sequential Treatment Allocation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 117(539), pages 1311-1323, September.
    19. Toru Kitagawa & Aleksey Tetenov, 2021. "Equality-Minded Treatment Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 561-574, March.
    20. Kitagawa, Toru & Wang, Guanyi, 2023. "Who should get vaccinated? Individualized allocation of vaccines over SIR network," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 109-131.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:2412.16352. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.