IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberte/0263.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Studies of Treatment Response to Inform Treatment Choice in Heterogeneous Populations

Author

Listed:
  • Charles F. Manski

Abstract

An important practical objective of empirical studies of treatment response is to provide decision makers with information useful in choosing treatments. Often the decision maker is a planner who must choose treatments for the members of a heterogeneous population; for example, a physician may choose medical treatments for a population of patients. Studies of treatment response cannot provide all the information that planners would like to have as they choose treatments, but researchers can be of service by addressing several questions: How should studies be designed in order to be most informative? How should studies report their findings so as to be most useful in decision making? How should planners utilize the information that studies provide? This paper addresses aspects of these broad questions, focusing on pervasive problems of identification and statistical inference that arise when studying treatment response.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles F. Manski, 2000. "Using Studies of Treatment Response to Inform Treatment Choice in Heterogeneous Populations," NBER Technical Working Papers 0263, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberte:0263
    Note: TWP
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/t0263.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manski, Charles F, 1990. "Nonparametric Bounds on Treatment Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 319-323, May.
    2. Horowitz, Joel & Manski, Charles, 1997. "Nonparametric Analysis of Randomized Experiments With Missing Covariate and Outcome Data," Working Papers 97-16, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
    3. Charles F. Manski, 1997. "Monotone Treatment Response," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1311-1334, November.
    4. Manski, Charles F., 1992. "Identification Problems In The Social Sciences," SSRI Workshop Series 292716, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Social Systems Research Institute.
    5. Manski, C.F., 1990. "The Selection Problem," Working papers 90-12, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    6. Manski, Charles F., 2000. "Identification problems and decisions under ambiguity: Empirical analysis of treatment response and normative analysis of treatment choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 415-442, April.
    7. Horowitz, Joel L. & Manski, Charles F., 1998. "Censoring of outcomes and regressors due to survey nonresponse: Identification and estimation using weights and imputations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 37-58, May.
    8. Charles F. Manski & John V. Pepper, 2000. "Monotone Instrumental Variables, with an Application to the Returns to Schooling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 997-1012, July.
    9. Manski, C.F. & Nagin, D.S., 1995. "Bounding Disagreements About Treatment Effects: A Case Study of Sentencing and Recidivism," Working papers 9526, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    10. Charles F. Manski, 1989. "Anatomy of the Selection Problem," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 24(3), pages 343-360.
    11. Dehejia, Rajeev H., 2005. "Program evaluation as a decision problem," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 141-173.
    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. Caliendo, Marco & Steiner, Viktor, 2005. "Aktive Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland : Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der mikroökonomischen Evaluationsergebnisse (Active labour market policy in Germany * review ans assessment of the microecono," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 38(2/3), pages 396-418.
    2. Caliendo, Marco & Steiner, Viktor, 2005. "Aktive Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland : Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der mikroökonomischen Evaluationsergebnisse (Active labour market policy in Germany * review ans assessment of the microecono," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 38(2/3), pages 396-418.
    3. Falk, Armin & Lalive, Rafael & Zweimüller, Josef, 2005. "The success of job applications: a new approach to program evaluation," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 739-748, December.
    4. Marco Caliendo & Reinhard Hujer & Stephan Thomsen, 2008. "Identifying effect heterogeneity to improve the efficiency of job creation schemes in Germany," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(9), pages 1101-1122.
    5. Caliendo, Marco & Steiner, Viktor, 2005. "Aktive Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland : Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der mikroökonomischen Evaluationsergebnisse (Active labour market policy in Germany * review ans assessment of the microecono," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 38(2/3), pages 396-418.
    6. Marco Caliendo & Viktor Steiner, 2005. "Aktive Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland: Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der mikroökonomischen Evaluationsergebnisse," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 515, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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. Charles F. Manski & John Newman & John V. Pepper, "undated". "Using Performance Standards to Evaluate Social Programs with Incomplete Outcome Data: General Issues and Application to a Higher Education Block Grant Program," IPR working papers 00-1, Institute for Policy Resarch at Northwestern University.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2003. "Identification Problems in the Social Sciences and Everyday Life," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(1), pages 11-21, July.
    3. Charles F. Manski, 1999. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations: With Application to Randomized Experiments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0242, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Libertad González, 2005. "Nonparametric bounds on the returns to language skills," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(6), pages 771-795.
    5. Charles F. Manski & John Newman & John V. Pepper, 2002. "Using Performance Standards to Evaluate Social Programs with Incomplete Outcome Data," Evaluation Review, , vol. 26(4), pages 355-381, August.
    6. Rosen, Adam M., 2008. "Confidence sets for partially identified parameters that satisfy a finite number of moment inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 107-117, September.
    7. David S. Lee, 2002. "Trimming for Bounds on Treatment Effects with Missing Outcomes," NBER Technical Working Papers 0277, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Giorgio Brunello & Dimitris Christelis & Anna Sanz‐de‐Galdeano & Anastasia Terskaya, 2024. "Does college selectivity reduce obesity? A partial identification approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(10), pages 2306-2320, October.
    9. Monique De Haan & Edwin Leuven, 2020. "Head Start and the Distribution of Long-Term Education and Labor Market Outcomes," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(3), pages 727-765.
    10. Arie Beresteanu & Francesca Molinari, 2008. "Asymptotic Properties for a Class of Partially Identified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 763-814, July.
    11. Dimitris Christelis & Dimitris Georgarakos & Tullio Jappelli & Geoff Kenny, 2020. "The Covid-19 Crisis and Consumption: Survey Evidence from Six EU Countries," Working Papers 2020_31, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    12. Markus Frölich, 2004. "Programme Evaluation with Multiple Treatments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 181-224, April.
    13. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    14. James J. Heckman & Edward J. Vytlacil, 2000. "Instrumental Variables, Selection Models, and Tight Bounds on the Average Treatment Effect," NBER Technical Working Papers 0259, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Aizawa, T.;, 2019. "Reviewing the Existing Evidence of the Conditional Cash Transfer in India through the Partial Identification Approach," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 19/24, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    16. Victor Chernozhukov & Wooyoung Kim & Sokbae Lee & Adam M. Rosen, 2015. "Implementing intersection bounds in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 15(1), pages 21-44, March.
    17. Michael Lechner & Blaise Melly, 2007. "Earnings Effects of Training Programs," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2007 2007-28, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    18. Vira Semenova, 2023. "Aggregated Intersection Bounds and Aggregated Minimax Values," Papers 2303.00982, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    19. Marco Francesconi, 2008. "Adult Outcomes for Children of Teenage Mothers," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(1), pages 93-117, March.
    20. Grafova, Irina B. & Freedman, Vicki A. & Lurie, Nicole & Kumar, Rizie & Rogowski, Jeannette, 2014. "The difference-in-difference method: Assessing the selection bias in the effects of neighborhood environment on health," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 20-33.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C10 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:nbr:nberte:0263. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.