Asymptotic separability in sensitivity analysis
Abstract
In an observational study in which each treated subject is matched to several untreated controls by using observed pretreatment covariates, a sensitivity analysis asks how hidden biases due to unobserved covariates might alter the conclusions. The bounds required for a sensitivity analysis are the solution to an optimization problem. In general, this optimization problem is not separable, in the sense that one cannot find the needed optimum by performing a separate optimization in each matched set and combining the results. We show, however, that this optimization problem is asymptotically separable, so that when there are many matched sets a separate optimization may be performed in each matched set and the results combined to yield the correct optimum with negligible error. This is true when the Wilcoxon rank sum test or the Hodges‐Lehmann aligned rank test is applied in matching with multiple controls. Numerical calculations show that the asymptotic approximation performs well with as few as 10 matched sets. In the case of the rank sum test, a table is given containing the separable solution. With this table, only simple arithmetic is required to conduct the sensitivity analysis. The method also supplies estimates, such as the Hodges‐Lehmann estimate, and confidence intervals associated with rank tests. The method is illustrated in a study of dropping out of US high schools and the effects on cognitive test scores.
Citing Literature
Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 19
- Bo Zhang, Dylan S. Small, A calibrated sensitivity analysis for matched observational studies with application to the effect of second‐hand smoke exposure on blood lead levels in children, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 10.1111/rssc.12443, 69, 5, (1285-1305), (2020).
- P L Cohen, M A Olson, C B Fogarty, Multivariate one-sided testing in matched observational studies as an adversarial game, Biometrika, 10.1093/biomet/asaa024, (2020).
- Paul R Rosenbaum, Combining planned and discovered comparisons in observational studies, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxy055, (2018).
- Qingyuan Zhao, On Sensitivity Value of Pair-Matched Observational Studies, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2018.1429277, (1-10), (2018).
- Colin B. Fogarty, Pixu Shi, Mark E. Mikkelsen, Dylan S. Small, Randomization Inference and Sensitivity Analysis for Composite Null Hypotheses With Binary Outcomes in Matched Observational Studies, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2016.1138865, 112, 517, (321-331), (2017).
- Colin B. Fogarty, Dylan S. Small, Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Comparisons in Matched Observational Studies Through Quadratically Constrained Linear Programming, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2015.1120675, 111, 516, (1820-1830), (2017).
- Peter Z. Schochet, John Burghardt, Using Propensity Scoring to Estimate Program-Related Subgroup Impacts in Experimental Program Evaluations, Evaluation Review, 10.1177/0193841X06288736, 31, 2, (95-120), (2016).
- Jeffrey Budziak, Daniel Lempert, Assessing Threats to Inference with Simultaneous Sensitivity Analysis: The Case of US Supreme Court Oral Arguments, Political Science Research and Methods, 10.1017/psrm.2015.74, 6, 01, (33-56), (2015).
- Paul R. Rosenbaum, Weighted M -statistics With Superior Design Sensitivity in Matched Observational Studies With Multiple Controls , Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2013.879261, 109, 507, (1145-1158), (2014).
- Paul R. Rosenbaum, Some Approximate Evidence Factors in Observational Studies, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1198/jasa.2011.tm10422, 106, 493, (285-295), (2011).
- Frank B. Yoon, Haiden A. Huskamp, Alisa B. Busch, Sharon-Lise T. Normand, Using Multiple Control Groups and Matching to Address Unobserved Biases in Comparative Effectiveness Research, Statistics in Biosciences, 10.1007/s12561-011-9035-4, 3, 1, (63-78), (2011).
- Paul R. Rosenbaum, Paul R. Rosenbaum, Two Simple Models for Observational Studies, Design of Observational Studies, 10.1007/978-1-4419-1213-8_3, (65-94), (2010).
- Paul R. Rosenbaum, Paul R. Rosenbaum, Dilemmas and Craftsmanship, Design of Observational Studies, 10.1007/978-1-4419-1213-8_1, (3-20), (2010).
- Charles Poole, On the Origin of Risk Relativism, Epidemiology, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c30eba, 21, 1, (3-9), (2010).
- P. R. Rosenbaum, Evidence factors in observational studies, Biometrika, 10.1093/biomet/asq019, 97, 2, (333-345), (2010).
- Jennifer L. Hill, Jane Waldfogel, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Wen-Jui Han, Maternal Employment and Child Development: A Fresh Look Using Newer Methods., Developmental Psychology, 10.1037/0012-1649.41.6.833, 41, 6, (833-850), (2005).
- Paul R. Rosenbaum, Paul R. Rosenbaum, Sensitivity to Hidden Bias, Observational Studies, 10.1007/978-1-4757-3692-2_4, (105-170), (2002).
- Paul R Rosenbaum, Attributing Effects to Treatment in Matched Observational Studies, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1198/016214502753479329, 97, 457, (183-192), (2002).
- Xiang Zhang, James D. Stamey, Maya B. Mathur, Assessing the impact of unmeasured confounders for credible and reliable real‐world evidence, Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 10.1002/pds.5117, 0, 0, (undefined).




