Zigler Corwin Matthew
Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
Am Stat. 2016 Mar 31;70(1):47-54. doi: 10.1080/00031305.2015.1111260. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
Although propensity scores have been central to the estimation of causal effects for over 30 years, only recently has the statistical literature begun to consider in detail methods for Bayesian estimation of propensity scores and causal effects. Underlying this recent body of literature on Bayesian propensity score estimation is an implicit discordance between the goal of the propensity score and the use of Bayes theorem. The propensity score condenses multivariate covariate information into a scalar to allow estimation of causal effects without specifying a model for how each covariate relates to the outcome. Avoiding specification of a detailed model for the outcome response surface is valuable for robust estimation of causal effects, but this strategy is at odds with the use of Bayes theorem, which presupposes a full probability model for the observed data that adheres to the likelihood principle. The goal of this paper is to explicate this fundamental feature of Bayesian estimation of causal effects with propensity scores in order to provide context for the existing literature and for future work on this important topic.
尽管倾向得分在因果效应估计中占据核心地位已有30多年,但直到最近,统计文献才开始详细考虑贝叶斯估计倾向得分和因果效应的方法。近期关于贝叶斯倾向得分估计的这一系列文献背后,是倾向得分的目标与贝叶斯定理的使用之间存在着一种隐含的不一致。倾向得分将多变量协变量信息浓缩为一个标量,以便在不指定每个协变量与结果如何关联的模型的情况下估计因果效应。避免为结果响应面指定详细模型对于稳健估计因果效应很有价值,但这种策略与贝叶斯定理的使用不一致,贝叶斯定理预先假定了一个遵循似然原理的观测数据的完整概率模型。本文的目标是阐明用倾向得分进行贝叶斯因果效应估计的这一基本特征,以便为现有文献以及关于这一重要主题的未来工作提供背景。