Kaplan David, Chen Jianshen
a Department of Educational Psychology , University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Multivariate Behav Res. 2014 Nov-Dec;49(6):505-17. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2014.928492.
This article considers Bayesian model averaging as a means of addressing uncertainty in the selection of variables in the propensity score equation. We investigate an approximate Bayesian model averaging approach based on the model-averaged propensity score estimates produced by the R package BMA but that ignores uncertainty in the propensity score. We also provide a fully Bayesian model averaging approach via Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling (MCMC) to account for uncertainty in both parameters and models. A detailed study of our approach examines the differences in the causal estimate when incorporating noninformative versus informative priors in the model averaging stage. We examine these approaches under common methods of propensity score implementation. In addition, we evaluate the impact of changing the size of Occam's window used to narrow down the range of possible models. We also assess the predictive performance of both Bayesian model averaging propensity score approaches and compare it with the case without Bayesian model averaging. Overall, results show that both Bayesian model averaging propensity score approaches recover the treatment effect estimates well and generally provide larger uncertainty estimates, as expected. Both Bayesian model averaging approaches offer slightly better prediction of the propensity score compared with the Bayesian approach with a single propensity score equation. Covariate balance checks for the case study show that both Bayesian model averaging approaches offer good balance. The fully Bayesian model averaging approach also provides posterior probability intervals of the balance indices.
本文将贝叶斯模型平均法视为解决倾向得分方程中变量选择不确定性的一种方法。我们研究了一种基于R包BMA生成的模型平均倾向得分估计值的近似贝叶斯模型平均法,但该方法忽略了倾向得分中的不确定性。我们还通过马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗抽样(MCMC)提供了一种完全贝叶斯模型平均法,以考虑参数和模型中的不确定性。对我们方法的详细研究考察了在模型平均阶段纳入无信息先验与有信息先验时因果估计的差异。我们在倾向得分实施的常用方法下研究这些方法。此外,我们评估了改变用于缩小可能模型范围的奥卡姆窗口大小的影响。我们还评估了两种贝叶斯模型平均倾向得分方法的预测性能,并将其与不采用贝叶斯模型平均的情况进行比较。总体而言,结果表明,两种贝叶斯模型平均倾向得分方法都能很好地恢复治疗效果估计值,并且通常如预期的那样提供更大的不确定性估计值。与具有单个倾向得分方程的贝叶斯方法相比,两种贝叶斯模型平均方法对倾向得分的预测略好。案例研究的协变量平衡检查表明,两种贝叶斯模型平均方法都具有良好的平衡性。完全贝叶斯模型平均法还提供了平衡指数的后验概率区间。