The Use of Propensity Scores to Assess the Generalizability of Results from Randomized Trials.¶
Stuart, E. A., Cole, S. R., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2011). The Use of Propensity Scores to Assess the Generalizability of Results from Randomized Trials. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A, 174(2), 369-386.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Transferability Overclaim
- Formally, \(\hat{\tau}\) estimates \(\tau = E[Y(1) - Y(0) \mid X \in \mathcal{R}]\), the effect conditioned on the covariate region \(\mathcal{R}\) the trial actually sampled.
This sourceFormalizes transporting a trial's treatment effect to a target population and the bias from covariate-region mismatch under effect modification.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Stuart et al. say a trial's estimate is unbiased for the effect in the trial sample (SATE), not automatically the target population; the covariate-region formalism is the entry's own.
“yields an unbiased estimate of the sample average treatment effect (SATE)”
- Formally, \(\hat{\tau}\) estimates \(\tau = E[Y(1) - Y(0) \mid X \in \mathcal{R}]\), the effect conditioned on the covariate region \(\mathcal{R}\) the trial actually sampled.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:3c7bf8e6fac5 · see in the full table