Our new X account is live! Follow @wizwand_team for updates
WorkDL logo mark

Matching Methods for Causal Inference: A Review and a Look Forward

About

When estimating causal effects using observational data, it is desirable to replicate a randomized experiment as closely as possible by obtaining treated and control groups with similar covariate distributions. This goal can often be achieved by choosing well-matched samples of the original treated and control groups, thereby reducing bias due to the covariates. Since the 1970s, work on matching methods has examined how to best choose treated and control subjects for comparison. Matching methods are gaining popularity in fields such as economics, epidemiology, medicine and political science. However, until now the literature and related advice has been scattered across disciplines. Researchers who are interested in using matching methods---or developing methods related to matching---do not have a single place to turn to learn about past and current research. This paper provides a structure for thinking about matching methods and guidance on their use, coalescing the existing research (both old and new) and providing a summary of where the literature on matching methods is now and where it should be headed.

Elizabeth A. Stuart• 2010

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Average Treatment Effect EstimationM3 Synthetic Dataset
ATE0.9
8
Average Treatment Effect EstimationM1 Synthetic Dataset
ATE4.68
8
Average Treatment Effect EstimationM2 Synthetic
ATE1.36
8
Variation in Treatment Effect (VTE) estimationIHDP
MAE0.06
5
CVTE estimationSynthetic CVTE Data size 500
MAE1.08
5
CVTE estimationSynthetic CVTE Data size 1000
MAE1.25
5
CVTE estimationSynthetic CVTE Data size 5000
MAE0.93
5
VTE estimationVTE Data size 500 synthetic (test)
MAE0.82
5
VTE estimationVTE Data size 1000 Synthetic (test)
MAE0.69
5
VTE estimationVTE Data size 5000 synthetic (test)
MAE0.5
5
Showing 10 of 10 rows

Other info

Follow for update