Characterizing the effect of matching using linear propensity score methods with normal distributions

SUMMARY Matched sampling is a standard technique for controlling bias in observational studies due to specific covariates. Since Rosenbaum & Rubin (1983), multivariate matching methods based on estimated propensity scores have been used with increasing frequency in medical, educational, and sociological applications. We obtain analytic expressions for the effect of matching using linear propensity score methods with normal distributions. These expressions cover cases where the propensity score is either known, or estimated using either discriminant analysis or logistic regression, as is typically done in current practice. The results show that matching using estimated propensity scores not only reduces bias along the population propensity score, but also controls variation of components orthogonal to it. Matching on estimated rather than population propensity scores can therefore lead to relatively large variance reduction, as much as a factor of two in common matching settings where close matches are possible. Approximations are given for the magnitude of this variance reduction, which can be computed using estimates obtained from the matching pools. Related expressions for bias reduction are also presented which suggest that, in difficult matching situations, the use of population scores leads to greater bias reduction than the use of estimated scores.

[1]  R. G. Carpenter,et al.  Matching when covariables are normally distributed , 1977 .

[2]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Affinely Invariant Matching Methods with Ellipsoidal Distributions , 1992 .

[3]  R L Kane,et al.  Improving Primary Care in Nursing Homes , 1991, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[4]  D. Rubin,et al.  Constructing a Control Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the Propensity Score , 1985 .

[5]  D. Rubin,et al.  Using Multivariate Matched Sampling and Regression Adjustment to Control Bias in Observational Studies , 1978 .

[6]  P. C. Chang,et al.  Robustness of Fisher's Linear Discriminant Function under Two-Component Mixed Normal Models , 1981 .

[7]  B. Efron The Efficiency of Logistic Regression Compared to Normal Discriminant Analysis , 1975 .

[8]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  MULTIVARIATE MATCHING METHODS THAT ARE EQUAL PERCENT BIAS REDUCING, I: SOME EXAMPLES , 1974 .

[9]  P. Rosenbaum Model-Based Direct Adjustment , 1987 .

[10]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Multivariate matching methods that are equal percent bias reducing , 1974 .

[11]  D. Rubin Matched Sampling for Causal Effects: The Use of Matched Sampling and Regression Adjustment to Remove Bias in Observational Studies , 1973 .

[12]  W. G. Cochran,et al.  Controlling Bias in Observational Studies: A Review. , 1974 .

[13]  S M McKinlay,et al.  Pair-matching-a reappraisal of a popular technique. , 1977, Biometrics.

[14]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[15]  D. Rubin Matched Sampling for Causal Effects: Matching to Remove Bias in Observational Studies , 1973 .

[16]  P. Rosenbaum Conditional Permutation Tests and the Propensity Score in Observational Studies , 1984 .

[17]  D. Rubin Bias Reduction Using Mahalanobis-Metric Matching , 1980 .