Designing Difference in Difference Studies: Best Practices for Public Health Policy Research
Coady Wing, Kosali Ilayperuma Simon, Ricardo A. Bello-Gómez
Indiana University Bloomington Indiana University National Bureau of Economic Research
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
The difference in difference (DID) design is a quasi-experimental research design that researchers often use to study causal relationships in public health settings where randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are infeasible or unethical. However, causal inference poses many challenges in DID designs. In this article, we review key features of DID designs with an emphasis on public health policy research. Contemporary researchers should take an active approach to the design of DID studies, seeking to construct comparison groups, sensitivity analyses, and robustness checks that help validate the method's assumptions. We explain the key assumptions of the design and discuss analytic tactics, supplementary analysis, and approaches to statistical inference that are often important in applied research. The DID design is not a perfect substitute for randomized experiments, but it often represents a feasible way to learn about casual relationships. We conclude by noting that combining elements from multiple quasi-experimental techniques may be important in the next wave of innovations to the DID approach.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
计算机 / AIAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
参考文献 97
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 1,465
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条