REVIEW 1 cited by
An average-case sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Sensitivity analysis for the unconfoundedness assumption is crucial in observational studies. For this purpose, the marginal sensitivity model gained popularity recently due to good interpretability and mathematical properties. However, most existing models only consider a worst-case parameter that bounds the logit difference between the observed and full data propensity scores, which may not fully capture the extent of unmeasured confounding. We propose a new sensitivity model that is parameterized by the second moment of the propensity score ratio, requiring only the average strength of unmeasured confounding to be bounded. By characterizing the associated sensitivity analysis as an optimization problem, we derive sharp closed-form bounds of the average potential outcomes under our model. We propose efficient one-step estimators for these bounds based on the corresponding efficient influence functions. Additionally, we apply multiplier bootstrap to construct simultaneous confidence bands to cover the sensitivity curve that consists of bounds at different values of the sensitivity parameters. Through a real-data study, we illustrate how this average-case sensitivity analysis can provide tighter bounds and facilitate calibration of the results using observed covariates.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Stochastic interventions, sensitivity analysis, and optimal transport
Generalized treatment policies built from optimal transport couplings resolve the non-collapsing bound problem and give sharp, efficient sensitivity bounds for stochastic interventions.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.