{"title":"三种倾向评分法对模拟治疗的平均治疗效果比较","authors":"Jiyoung Mun, Hyunchul Kim","doi":"10.31158/jeev.2022.35.4.555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compared the average treatment effect on the treated(ATT) of three propensity score methods- logistic regression model, generalized boosted model, and Bayesian model– by simulation. The simulated data were generated under two sample sizes, four covariates models, and four model intercepts conditions. The results shaw that generalized boosted model and Bayesian model also provide smaller bias than logistic regression model when the sample size was small(N=200). And, generalized boosted model and Bayesian model provide small bias than logistic regression model. It was interpreted that the propensity score method which takes into account the distribution of covariates produce more adequate estimation of causal effect.","PeriodicalId":207460,"journal":{"name":"Korean Society for Educational Evaluation","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of three Propensity Score Methods’ Average Treatment Effect on the Treat by Simulation\",\"authors\":\"Jiyoung Mun, Hyunchul Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.31158/jeev.2022.35.4.555\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study compared the average treatment effect on the treated(ATT) of three propensity score methods- logistic regression model, generalized boosted model, and Bayesian model– by simulation. The simulated data were generated under two sample sizes, four covariates models, and four model intercepts conditions. The results shaw that generalized boosted model and Bayesian model also provide smaller bias than logistic regression model when the sample size was small(N=200). And, generalized boosted model and Bayesian model provide small bias than logistic regression model. It was interpreted that the propensity score method which takes into account the distribution of covariates produce more adequate estimation of causal effect.\",\"PeriodicalId\":207460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Society for Educational Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Society for Educational Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31158/jeev.2022.35.4.555\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Society for Educational Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31158/jeev.2022.35.4.555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Comparison of three Propensity Score Methods’ Average Treatment Effect on the Treat by Simulation
This study compared the average treatment effect on the treated(ATT) of three propensity score methods- logistic regression model, generalized boosted model, and Bayesian model– by simulation. The simulated data were generated under two sample sizes, four covariates models, and four model intercepts conditions. The results shaw that generalized boosted model and Bayesian model also provide smaller bias than logistic regression model when the sample size was small(N=200). And, generalized boosted model and Bayesian model provide small bias than logistic regression model. It was interpreted that the propensity score method which takes into account the distribution of covariates produce more adequate estimation of causal effect.