用于政策评估研究的差分方法的进展。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-05 DOI:10.1097/EDE.0000000000001755
Guangyi Wang, Rita Hamad, Justin S White
{"title":"用于政策评估研究的差分方法的进展。","authors":"Guangyi Wang, Rita Hamad, Justin S White","doi":"10.1097/EDE.0000000000001755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Difference-in-differences (DiD) is a powerful, quasi-experimental research design widely used in longitudinal policy evaluations with health outcomes. However, DiD designs face several challenges to ensuring reliable causal inference, such as when policy settings are more complex. Recent economics literature has revealed that DiD estimators may exhibit bias when heterogeneous treatment effects, a common consequence of staggered policy implementation, are present. To deepen our understanding of these advancements in epidemiology, in this methodologic primer, we start by presenting an overview of DiD methods. We then summarize fundamental problems associated with DiD designs with heterogeneous treatment effects and provide guidance on recently proposed heterogeneity-robust DiD estimators, which are increasingly being implemented by epidemiologists. We also extend the discussion to violations of the parallel trends assumption, which has received less attention. Last, we present results from a simulation study that compares the performance of several DiD estimators under different scenarios to enhance understanding and application of these methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":11779,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"628-637"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11305929/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advances in Difference-in-differences Methods for Policy Evaluation Research.\",\"authors\":\"Guangyi Wang, Rita Hamad, Justin S White\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/EDE.0000000000001755\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Difference-in-differences (DiD) is a powerful, quasi-experimental research design widely used in longitudinal policy evaluations with health outcomes. However, DiD designs face several challenges to ensuring reliable causal inference, such as when policy settings are more complex. Recent economics literature has revealed that DiD estimators may exhibit bias when heterogeneous treatment effects, a common consequence of staggered policy implementation, are present. To deepen our understanding of these advancements in epidemiology, in this methodologic primer, we start by presenting an overview of DiD methods. We then summarize fundamental problems associated with DiD designs with heterogeneous treatment effects and provide guidance on recently proposed heterogeneity-robust DiD estimators, which are increasingly being implemented by epidemiologists. We also extend the discussion to violations of the parallel trends assumption, which has received less attention. Last, we present results from a simulation study that compares the performance of several DiD estimators under different scenarios to enhance understanding and application of these methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"628-637\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11305929/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000001755\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000001755","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

差分法(DiD)是一种功能强大的准实验研究设计,广泛应用于健康结果的纵向政策评估中。然而,DiD 设计在确保可靠的因果推论方面面临着一些挑战,比如当政策环境较为复杂时。最近的经济学文献显示,当出现异质性治疗效果(交错实施政策的常见后果)时,DiD 估计器可能会出现偏差。为了加深对这些流行病学进展的理解,在本方法论入门指南中,我们首先介绍了 DiD 方法的概述。然后,我们总结了与具有异质性治疗效果的 DiD 设计相关的基本问题,并为最近提出的异质性稳健 DiD 估计器提供了指导,流行病学家正在越来越多地使用这些估计器。我们还将讨论扩展到违反平行趋势假设的情况,这一点关注较少。最后,我们介绍了一项模拟研究的结果,该研究比较了几种 DiD 估计器在不同情况下的性能,以加深对这些方法的理解和应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Advances in Difference-in-differences Methods for Policy Evaluation Research.

Difference-in-differences (DiD) is a powerful, quasi-experimental research design widely used in longitudinal policy evaluations with health outcomes. However, DiD designs face several challenges to ensuring reliable causal inference, such as when policy settings are more complex. Recent economics literature has revealed that DiD estimators may exhibit bias when heterogeneous treatment effects, a common consequence of staggered policy implementation, are present. To deepen our understanding of these advancements in epidemiology, in this methodologic primer, we start by presenting an overview of DiD methods. We then summarize fundamental problems associated with DiD designs with heterogeneous treatment effects and provide guidance on recently proposed heterogeneity-robust DiD estimators, which are increasingly being implemented by epidemiologists. We also extend the discussion to violations of the parallel trends assumption, which has received less attention. Last, we present results from a simulation study that compares the performance of several DiD estimators under different scenarios to enhance understanding and application of these methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiology
Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
177
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology publishes original research from all fields of epidemiology. The journal also welcomes review articles and meta-analyses, novel hypotheses, descriptions and applications of new methods, and discussions of research theory or public health policy. We give special consideration to papers from developing countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信