This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Jo, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Estimation of Intervention Effects with Noncompliance: Alternative Model Specifications

University of California, Los Angeles

This study examines alternative ways of specifying models in the complier average causal effect (CACE) estimation method, where the major interest is in estimating causal effects of treatments for compliers. A fundamental difficulty involved in the CACE estimation method is in dealing with missing compliance information among study participants. Given that, the assumption of the exclusion restriction plays a critical role in separating the distributions of compliers and non-compliers. If no pretreatment covariates are available, assuming the exclusion restriction is unavoidable to obtain unique ML estimates in CACE models, although the assumption can be often unrealistic. One disadvantage of assuming the exclusion restriction is that the CACE estimate can be biased if the assumption is violated. Another disadvantage is that the assumption limits the flexibility of CACE modeling in practice. However, if pretreatment covariates are available, more modeling options other than strictly forcing the exclusion restriction can be considered to establish identifiability of CACE models. This study explores modeling possibilities of CACE estimation within an ML-EM framework in the presence of covariate information.

Key Words: Keywords: assignment effects • CACE • exclusion restriction • missing data • ML-EM • non-compliance • pretreatment covariates

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 27, No. 4, 385-409 (2002)
DOI: 10.3102/10769986027004385


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Jo Bias Mechanisms in Intention-to-Treat Analysis With Data Subject to Treatment Noncompliance and Missing Outcomes Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, June 1, 2008; 33(2): 158 - 185. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. E. Sobel Identification of Causal Parameters in Randomized Studies With Mediating Variables Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, June 1, 2008; 33(2): 230 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Grilli and F. Mealli Nonparametric Bounds on the Causal Effect of University Studies on Job Opportunities Using Principal Stratification Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, March 1, 2008; 33(1): 111 - 130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Dunn, M. Maracy, and B. Tomenson Estimating treatment effects from randomized clinical trials with noncompliance and loss to follow-up: the role of instrumental variable methods Statistical Methods in Medical Research, August 1, 2005; 14(4): 369 - 395. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Muthen and K. Masyn Discrete-Time Survival Mixture Analysis Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 2005; 30(1): 27 - 58. [Abstract] [PDF]