Counting Defiers: Examples from Health Care

I propose a finite sample inference procedure that uses a likelihood function derived from the randomization process within an experiment to conduct inference on various quantities that capture heterogeneous intervention effects. One such quantity is the number of defiers---individuals whose treatment runs counter to the intervention. Results from the literature make informative inference on this quantity seem impossible, but they rely on different assumptions and data. I only require data on the cross-tabulations of a binary intervention and a binary treatment. Replacing the treatment variable with a more general outcome variable, I can perform inference on important quantities analogous to the number of defiers. I apply the procedure to test safety and efficacy in hypothetical drug trials for which the point estimate of the average intervention effect implies that at least 40 out of 100 individuals would be saved. In one trial, I infer with 95% confidence that at least 3 individuals would be killed, which could stop the drug from being approved.

[1]  Amanda E. Kowalski A Model of a Randomized Experiment with an Application to the Prowess Clinical Trial , 2019, 1908.05810.

[2]  W. Hoeffding Scale—Invariant Correlation Theory , 1994 .

[3]  P. Holland Statistics and Causal Inference , 1985 .

[4]  Charles F. Manski,et al.  The Mixing Problem in Program Evaluation , 1997 .

[5]  Wassily Hoeffding Scale—Invariant Correlation Measures for Discontinuous Distributions , 1994 .

[6]  David R. Cox Planning of Experiments , 1958 .

[7]  M. Huber,et al.  Relaxing monotonicity in the identification of local average treatment effects , 2012 .

[8]  C. Manski Monotone Treatment Response , 2009, Identification for Prediction and Decision.

[9]  T. Kitagawa A Test for Instrument Validity , 2015 .

[10]  Martin Huber,et al.  Testing Instrument Validity for LATE Identification Based on Inequality Moment Constraints , 2015, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[11]  P. Ding,et al.  Exact confidence intervals for the average causal effect on a binary outcome. , 2016, Statistics in Medicine.

[12]  Patrick M. Kline,et al.  Reasonable Doubt: Experimental Detection of Job-Level Employment Discrimination , 2020, Econometrica.

[13]  J. Heckman,et al.  Instrumental Variables, Selection Models, and Tight Bounds on the Average Treatment Effect , 2000 .

[14]  Amanda E. Kowalski Counting Defiers , 2019, 1908.05811.

[15]  D. Rubin,et al.  Estimating Outcome Distributions for Compliers in Instrumental Variables Models , 1997 .

[16]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  EXACT AND ASYMPTOTICALLY ROBUST PERMUTATION TESTS , 2013, 1304.5939.

[17]  Instrumental variables and the sign of the average treatment effect , 2019, Journal of Econometrics.

[18]  J. Angrist,et al.  Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects , 1995 .